Redskins Trade Rumors: Don't Let Facts Get in the Way of a Good Story
In the Denver Post, columnist Bill Williamson regurgitates some trade and free agency rumors that have been floating around ever since the end of the season:
Believe the reports that the Redskins are going to try to pry receiver Chad Johnson from Cincinnati. Johnson has been vocal about his desire to be dealt but Bengals coach Marvin Lewis recently said the Pro Bowl player will not be traded.
If Johnson isn't traded, the Redskins could turn their attention to Javon Walker, who, like Johnson, wants to be traded. Yet, unlike Cincinnati, Denver wants to accommodate Walker with a trade.
Washington and Denver have been willing trading partners in the past and could easily make a deal. If not Walker, Washington could pursue Oakland's Jerry Porter.
Rumors also are making the rounds that the Skins are after Lance Briggs and that they are going to give him the $20 million guaranteed and $7 million annual contract that his agent is seeking.
In other words, the Redskins are going to party like it’s 2000.
All of these tales are forgetting one little fact that will seriously hamper the Redskins if, indeed, they wanted to go raiding other teams of their veteran talent. When it’s 12:01 AM this Friday, the Redskins will be under the salary cap by the slimmest of margins.
It’s only slightly more than the value of the spare change I have sitting on my dresser right now.
Certainly, we’ve seen the Redskins work some magic with the cap in the past, reworking a deal here and guaranteeing a bonus there and, boom, there’s room on the credit card to go shopping. And the Skins undoubtedly will make a move or two for depth or perhaps a second-tier receiver with size and they will need to rework deals to accomplish that.
It’s not that they can’t create enough space to take on Johnson’s salary or to work something with Lance Briggs. And, with the Redskins the key phrase always is “never say never.” But every year the writers lap up whatever Drew Rosenhaus and the other cadre of agents gathered at the combine feed them and this year is no exception.
No sense in letting the facts get in the way of a good story.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?