View Full Version : Football Rudi Johnson cut
The Bad Guy
08-30-2008, 12:48 PM
Hilarious.
It's the smart move for the Bengals though. Perry and Watson are better.
Hootie
08-30-2008, 12:50 PM
he sucks anyways...he's not even Shaun Alexander caliber...and that's sad. Doubt he resurfaces, and if he does, he won't make an impact.
eazyb81
08-30-2008, 12:55 PM
It's crazy how RBs fade so quickly.
Hammock Parties
08-30-2008, 12:59 PM
We should sign him. We would be deep at RB.
Skyy God
08-30-2008, 02:02 PM
We should sign him. We would be deep at RB.
You can't be f-ing serious.
Hootie
08-30-2008, 02:07 PM
You can't be f-ing serious.
I think he was TOTALLY serious.
L.A. Chieffan
08-30-2008, 02:14 PM
I'm glad I didn't draft him.
2007 Stats
L. Johnson - 159 attempts / 559 yards / 3.5 YPC / 3 TD
R. Johnson - 170 attempts / 497 yards / 2.9 YPC / 3 TD
Just sayin' is all.
NCarlsCorner2
08-30-2008, 02:22 PM
2007 Stats
L. Johnson - 159 attempts / 559 yards / 3.5 YPC / 3 TD
R. Johnson - 170 attempts / 497 yards / 2.9 YPC / 3 TD
Just sayin' is all.
What was his stats against the Chiefs, seems like he always tore us up.
Bowser
08-30-2008, 02:26 PM
They let Chris Henry come back, but cut Rudi Johnson. What an abortion of a team. They're striving to become the Cardinals before 1998.
We need to start a "Free Carson Palmer" movement.
J Diddy
08-30-2008, 02:29 PM
I'm glad I didn't draft him.
I did
:cuss:
siberian khatru
08-30-2008, 02:30 PM
He can't stay healthy anymore.
Buehler445
08-30-2008, 02:54 PM
I did
:cuss:
ROFL
Mecca
08-30-2008, 03:11 PM
They let Chris Henry come back, but cut Rudi Johnson. What an abortion of a team. They're striving to become the Cardinals before 1998.
We need to start a "Free Carson Palmer" movement.
Rudi Johnson is done, Henry for all his issues is younger and extremely talented...
Ah well I guess we better get a look cause we're gonna be looking at this position in a year or 2.
Hammock Parties
08-30-2008, 03:15 PM
A year or two...lol.
Mecca
08-30-2008, 03:22 PM
A year or two...lol.
Um in 2 years Larry Johnson is over 30....it amuses me to no end that people think he's going to be a productive back until he's 35.
Hammock Parties
08-30-2008, 03:23 PM
Um in 2 years Larry Johnson is over 30....it amuses me to no end that people think he's going to be a productive back until he's 35.
No, Mecca. In two years Larry Johnson will be 30.
I think he will play here til he is 33 or 34. Go **** yourself.
Mecca
08-30-2008, 03:25 PM
No, Mecca. In two years Larry Johnson will be 30.
I think he will play here til he is 33 or 34. Go **** yourself.
Maybe he will but he won't be productive, I'd bet anything that he will not be a productive RB at 34 years old.
You're way to attached to this player to admit the truth, letting your personal feelings cloud judgement.
triple
08-30-2008, 03:36 PM
didnt they pay him like 30 million a couple of years ago? i dont think you can afford to pay running backs that way in the nfl anymore the way they decline so fast
Mosbonian
08-30-2008, 04:59 PM
I would like to point out that Andre Woodson was cut by the Giants today.
mmaddog
*******
Mecca
08-30-2008, 05:00 PM
I would like to point out that Andre Woodson was cut by the Giants today.
mmaddog
*******
I'd point out that he isn't playing WR.
The Bad Guy
08-30-2008, 05:02 PM
Um in 2 years Larry Johnson is over 30....it amuses me to no end that people think he's going to be a productive back until he's 35.
I think his season from 2006 gets massively overblown.
I think he can be a productive back for at least 4 more years.
LJ didn't really touch the ball until his senior year in college. He has a lot of tread still left on his legs.
SAUTO
08-30-2008, 05:03 PM
I think his season from 2006 gets massively overblown.
I think he can be a productive back for at least 4 more years.
LJ didn't really touch the ball until his senior year in college. He has a lot of tread still left on his legs.
thank you
Mecca
08-30-2008, 05:03 PM
Well it depends on the definition of productive, but I think that year killed any thoughts of him having fresh legs.
Mosbonian
08-30-2008, 05:05 PM
I'd point out that he isn't playing WR.
And I would point out you were sure he was going to make the roster.
Then I would tell you that he never even tried to make himself a receiver...or anything else. And remind you that I stated his only chance to make it in the NFL was as a possession reciever.
But then again you never truly tried to understand what I was saying.
mmaddog
*******
Mecca
08-30-2008, 05:07 PM
You tried to tell me that a guy who runs a 5 second 40 could play WR.....it's like saying Matt Ryan can be a WR.
I will never ever ever give to you on that because to be frank it was one of the dumbest things I HAVE EVER READ.
Mosbonian
08-30-2008, 05:28 PM
You tried to tell me that a guy who runs a 5 second 40 could play WR.....it's like saying Matt Ryan can be a WR.
I will never ever ever give to you on that because to be frank it was one of the dumbest things I HAVE EVER READ.
See you're too hung up on speed.....some of the best possession receivers were never fast, they were good hands guys.
And for you to say that it was the dumbest thing that you have ever read only makes me laugh. That means you never read your own stuff.
mmaddog
*******
Ok, I hesitate to ask, but.......why would Andre Woodson be a receiver? I'm having trouble following those posts.
Spicy McHaggis
08-30-2008, 05:36 PM
We should sign him. We would be deep at RB.
I think he should be our new fullback.
Mosbonian
08-30-2008, 05:43 PM
Ok, I hesitate to ask, but.......why would Andre Woodson be a receiver? I'm having trouble following those posts.
A long time ago there was an argument between Mecca and I over his value as a QB in the NFL. Mecca was sure he would make it, even predicting a 1st round pick along with Brohm of Louisville.
My contention, having watched Woodson play for 2 years was that his only shot in the NFL was as a possession receiver, you know a guy with good hands, a 3rd down guy like we used to have with Todd McNair a long time ago. Woodson has no speed, but a possession reciever doesn't need it..they need good hands, can hang onto the ball when being hit, and know how to run after possession.
Not all receivers have to be speedy....Largent comes to mind. Hell, even Hines Ward isn't all that fast.
mmaddog
*******
A long time ago there was an argument between Mecca and I over his value as a QB in the NFL. Mecca was sure he would make it, even predicting a 1st round pick along with Brohm of Louisville.
My contention, having watched Woodson play for 2 years was that his only shot in the NFL was as a possession receiver, you know a guy with good hands, a 3rd down guy like we used to have with Todd McNair a long time ago. Woodson has no speed, but a possession reciever doesn't need it..they need good hands, can hang onto the ball when being hit, and know how to run after possession.
Not all receivers have to be speedy....Largent comes to mind. Hell, even Hines Ward isn't all that fast.
mmaddog
*******
I can see the logic there, especially now that he's been cut. He'd make a nice sized target.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.