Though everything is subject to change when it comes to Bengals receiver Chad Johnson, we’re told that Johnson’s current plan is to avoid breaching his contract (and owing daily fines and possibly a chunk of previously-paid bonus money) by reporting for a mandatory minicamp that opens on June 12.
As we hear it, Johnson intends to report but to “not do anything.” Such an approach is similar to the strategy employed by receiver Terrell Owens three years ago in Philly, who reported for training camp with the goal of being such a pain in the butt that the team would either trade him or cut him.
And such an approach presumably would ultimately subject Johnson to discipline, up to and including a four-game suspension without pay for conduct detrimental to the team. The Bengals would be wise to keep meticulous track of everything Johnson says and does in order to support any action that the team eventually is forced to take, just as the Eagles did in 2005.
It remains to be seen whether Johnson follows through on his plan to report for the mandatory camp, and whether he plans to create any type of disruption. The fact that Johnson has been silent since his effort to finagle a trade out of town prior to the draft suggests to us that he’s hoping that folks will forget the things he said for much of the offseason prior to late April.
_2.gif)





June 1st, 2008 at 12:05 am
Should anyone be surprised by this??
I think Deter was right. He is really showing his “mental agility” on a continual basis.
Move over TO. It is possible that your dismantling of Philly a few years ago will be totally forgotten if this knucklehead has his way.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 12:12 am
if the bengals didn’t want chad he’d be gone. So if chad don’t wanna play in cinnci i say let him go!!!!!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 3:46 am
I’ve been a Bengals fan all my life, and I don’t want him there. All he is going to do is disrupt the team. The Bengals are pulling together as a team right now and they don’t need the distraction. I know Mike Brown is trying to make a point, but the Bengals need for Chad to be gone, and they may as well make something out of the deal.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4.4 / 5 with 5 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 8:18 am
Chad isn’t caving, he has all the leverage. he comes in on time, the team pays him. he plays half ass, they may sit him but he still gets paid. he could tell the other teams the game plans to get back at the Bengals etc. the fact that he doesn’t have to do anything but show up, shows he’s in charge.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2.35 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 8:45 am
Of course he is gonna show up. I said all along he would show up. He is not caving in by showing up, the Bengals want him to not show so that they don’t have to pay him and can even fine him. If Chad doesn;t show up the Bengals can move on in peace without giving Chad what he wants and they get a financial bonus. By showing up, Chad is forcing the Bengals hand. The organization and the players will have to deal with the elephant in the room. As much as I dislike Roseanhaus, after going through the situation with Owens a few years ago he knows exactly how to direct his client to achieve his goal of getting traded or released. Even if he doesn’t and Bengals org continues to be stubborn, Johnson will get paid a few million dollars this year to basically show and go through the motions with no real effort (and thats even if he faces a 4 game suspension).
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3.65 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 8:59 am
‘Move over TO. It is possible that your dismantling of Philly a few years ago will be totally forgotten if this knucklehead has his way.’
I’d have to disagree, Philly was one year removed from a Superbowl appearance. However Chad behaves he is still only destroying the Bengals which is essentially dividing by zero.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2.6 / 5 with 5 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 10:02 am
Why do you keep looking at TO all he has to do is pull a Moss. That punk alligator armed every catch for a year, ran a step slow, and and sulked. He was then “traded” for a football and two rolls of tape. Chad will play his way out of Cincy and then everyone will make fun of them for not taking the bounty of picks from Washington. Yes football is a business, but the business is winning!, Mike Brown won the battle and lost the war.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 4 / 5 with 4 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 10:41 am
Who cares?
Quarantine him. Let him alligator arm a couple balls and move down on the depth chart. The bigger picture is setting expectations for the rest of your team going forward. You trade him and you’ve given every prima donna carte blanche to be a TO.
From what I’ve read I think there are a lot of Bengals that would find it entertaining to see Chad frozen out.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am
@Overlord Vader,Look at the bright side Moss the alligator armed, slow, sulking,rocking kicking little bitch was denied a SuperBowl
Ring.
@ Moss and Patriots Karma is a MF.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 12:36 pm
This sort of prima donna behavior is deplorable. He’s being paid MILLIONS to play a game and catch a football……yet he’s unhappy and sulking like a little girl.
I hope he gets his head removed on blind hit.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 3 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 2:38 pm
JohnStoffa, you mention the bigger picture but you don’t seem to grasp the bigger the picture. The rest of the team will view the Bengals’s handling of Chad Johnson as a sign that they don’t care about winning or the rest of the players. If they did would trade Chad for assets that could help the others players on the team win and remove the distraction of having him present. By paying Chad millions of dollars to hang out and be a distraction to everyone is not in the best interest of the remaining players - AND THAT IS THE BIGGER PICTURE. You are looking at the small picture - that the Bengals didnt give Chad Johnson what he wanted. But the big picture is how it affects the other players.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 1st, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Or maybe, since I have to spell it out for you idiot, they don’t want players thinking that’s what they have to do if they want to be traded. It’s stupid to suggest them trading either. And as Florio (I think Florio) pointed out before most of the team likes how they are handling it. Chad will play his heart out next year when the Bengals start winning. Chad has no leverage at all. To even suggest that he did is crazy.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:25 am
Right on Boberto. The players in Cincy have been wanting Marvin to put his foot down for AWHILE now. He was already a distraction, everything else is downhill from the playoff game. No where to go but up. Someone else mentioned it, and I think that what will happen is he will Randy Moss/Ricky Watters some passes and they can promptly sit his butt on the bench or even keep him inactive for a few games + the four games he’ll eventually get for conduct detrimental. Trading him for picks would have been the dumbest thing they could have done. Basically showing every player on the team, throw a fit, get shipped. That is the SMALLER picture SkinsFan. The bigger picture is making sure you know when you come to work for an NFL team. You DO YOUR JOB and ABIDE YOUR ALREADY NICE CONTRACT.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
cincyeaglefan, ok explain to me how keeping Chad helps the team win? You say you expect Chad to tank it and the team will have to sit him. How does that help the team? It doesn’t. And meanwhile Chad still makes millions, yeah that’ll really show him. He gets paid to do not much and the team continues to lose. I will repeat the SMALL picture is focusing in on how to punish Chad, the BIG picture is focusing in how to put the most competitive team on the field. Unless you can justify how keeping Chad helps the Bengals win, then the decision to keep him is stupid and petty.
History lesson: The Bengals basically did the same thing with Corey Dillion. Refused to trade him. He eventually finished out his contract and left as a free agent and Bengals got no compensation. Corey Dillion went on to a successful career with the Patriots and won a SuperBowl and retired happy. So how did punishing Dillion work out… Bengals = Nothing. Dillion = Retired Happy with a SuperBowl.
As long as a team is required to pay a player whether they perform or not, the players will always have the leverage. The team can hold their rights and sit them on the bench but they still have to pay them. If there were no salary cap, sure the team can eat the salary loss to stand on principle. But with a cap, that is money that can’t be used to replace the talent the team is losing by punishing one player.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
henry plainview, its crazy to think chad has all the leverage. if he had the leverage he wouldnt show up. chad wants more money. not playing hard and using alligator arms on passes thrown his way would not get him more money from the bengals or any other team. even if he stays and tries to pull a TO. he’s only an distraction if the players allow him to be. i would give him a chance to perform and if he doesnt give 100% i’d bench him and isolate him from the other players.
oh yeah correct me if i’m wrong but i thought 85 said he may retire if he wasnt traded?
sounds to me like he lost the war!!!
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
June 2nd, 2008 at 1:54 pm
chad is getting paid a lot considering he is as smart as a “soap dish”.
if only he remained as quiet as a soap dish…
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:26 am
Is it possible the NFL needs performance based salaries. Keep the signing bonuses and have a base pay per game and incentive laden contracts. You’d see guys begging to play (injured even) if they’re getting paid by the tackle or by the catch or by the carry. Can this work ? anyone have an opinion ? can it work the other way ? a fumble costs you money…lol… opps i just dropped 10,000 bucks !!
PS I think if the CBA gets broken the leauge will be a mess again. I think free agency and revenue sharing is the best thing to ever happen to the NFL.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: Not yet rated