PDA

View Full Version : Rudi Johnson and the franchise tag



Javalon
02-21-2005, 10:31 AM
I just read an article (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8201532) about the the Cincinatti Bengals slapping the franchise tag on Rudi Johnson. Johnson isn't happy and is threatening to hold out. But here's my question about the whole situation:

Is Rudi Johnson even worth the franchise tag? The average of the top 5 paid running backs in the NFL?

Okay, he finished 6th in rushing yards but he was only #9 in rushing yards per game by guys that started at least half their games. He was 8th in rushing TDs, but again would have been further down the list in TDs per game or per carry. His yards per carry were way below the five running backs who had more overall yards than him and he was pretty far down the list overall. He contributed less than ONE reception per game so there's no justification in the receiving department.

So, are the Bengals simply doing this because they would look foolish for trading Corey Dillon and then losing Johnson to free agency? :confused: If so, that pride sure is an expensive thing, ain't it?

Dream
02-21-2005, 10:37 AM
Remember Javalon; they drafted Chris Perry from Michigan in last years draft and he looks to be a promising young back with a ton of potential; perhaps they're looking to deal out Johnson and free up some cap space to address other needs that the Bengals might have this off-season, (which would probably include a defensive lineman and maybe some linebacking help).

I don't know if he's worth it; but is there really any player on their team that is worth the franchise tag?

The only thing I can think of is that they're looking to trade Johnson and give Perry a shot at running back; which seems like the most logical of answers beings how he was drafted in the first round of last years draft.

Javalon
02-21-2005, 10:48 AM
Remember Javalon; they drafted Chris Perry from Michigan in last years draft and he looks to be a promising young back with a ton of potential; perhaps they're looking to deal out Johnson and free up some cap space to address other needs that the Bengals might have this off-season, (which would probably include a defensive lineman and maybe some linebacking help).

I don't know if he's worth it; but is there really any player on their team that is worth the franchise tag?

The only thing I can think of is that they're looking to trade Johnson and give Perry a shot at running back; which seems like the most logical of answers beings how he was drafted in the first round of last years draft.
Hmm. I forgot about Perry.

He had all of 2 carries last season so he's far from a proven commodity. And nobody's going to give up 2 first round picks for Johnson. So, could it be that the Bengals really want to keep Johnson for one more season while they see what Perry has to offer? Or, like you mentioned, perhaps they're hoping for a trade and are willing to take a chance on Perry without seeing him play in real games.

"I don't know if he's worth it; but is there really any player on their team that is worth the franchise tag?"

True. But just because you have the franchise tag available doesn't mean you have to use it. Just like the Broncos, I think it would be a bad move to use it on any of their current crop of free agents. That's assuming you can't simply retract the franchise tag once you've placed it on a player; I'm not certain of that but it makes sense.

Dream
02-21-2005, 10:58 AM
I'm doubting nobody will trade two first rounders for him; however there are certainly teams in need of a running back but I think it'd be in their best interest to draft one on their own. Perhaps doing this is insurance for them because maybe they don't have "faith" in Chris Perry as of right now; who knows. I think this was a stupid move by the Bengals and I have no idea what they're trying to do.

Javalon
02-21-2005, 11:07 AM
I'm doubting nobody will trade two first rounders for him; however there are certainly teams in need of a running back but I think it'd be in their best interest to draft one on their own. Perhaps doing this is insurance for them because maybe they don't have "faith" in Chris Perry as of right now; who knows. I think this was a stupid move by the Bengals and I have no idea what they're trying to do.
Well, perhaps it's just the Bengals being the Bengals. They're too close to being a successful team so the GM is trying to screw things up and get back to being the league's laughingstocks. :goofy:

TXBRONC
02-21-2005, 02:06 PM
I just read an article (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8201532) about the the Cincinatti Bengals slapping the franchise tag on Rudi Johnson. Johnson isn't happy and is threatening to hold out. But here's my question about the whole situation:

Is Rudi Johnson even worth the franchise tag? The average of the top 5 paid running backs in the NFL?

Okay, he finished 6th in rushing yards but he was only #9 in rushing yards per game by guys that started at least half their games. He was 8th in rushing TDs, but again would have been further down the list in TDs per game or per carry. His yards per carry were way below the five running backs who had more overall yards than him and he was pretty far down the list overall. He contributed less than ONE reception per game so there's no justification in the receiving department.

So, are the Bengals simply doing this because they would look foolish for trading Corey Dillon and then losing Johnson to free agency? :confused: If so, that pride sure is an expensive thing, ain't it?

It sounds strange. Wasn't there another article out there that said he wanted a long term deal but the Bengals balked at the idea?

Javalon
02-21-2005, 04:31 PM
It sounds strange. Wasn't there another article out there that said he wanted a long term deal but the Bengals balked at the idea?
I'm not sure. But I guess it would depend on how the two parties defined "long term."

Regardless, it just sounds like the Bengals are regressing into making their players want to leave town. I continually feel sorry for Cincy fans.