St. Louis Rams: The Rams Should Sign Ex-Dolphin Chad Johnson
The life of Chad Johnson has had an interesting 24 hours.
Saturday, Johnson was arrested for domestic battery for reportedly head-butting his new wife. The same wife that Johnson changed his name from Ochocinco back to Johnson for.
Sunday saw Johnson post the $2,500 bond, and he walked out of jail while his teammates were working out. He never took the field with the team again.
While Johnson may be one team's trash, it could be another team's treasure. Namely, the St. Louis Rams.
The Rams had a terrible receiving corps last season. The Rams only averaged 12 points per game and averaged 204 receiving yards per game. They were ranked 27th out of 32 teams. That was even with the acquisition of Brandon Lloyd at the trade deadline.
While Lloyd may have been the biggest name on the Rams, he only had five touchdowns on 51 receptions for 683 yards. Pretty good numbers for only playing 11 games with the Rams. But with a supporting cast of Danny Amendola, Danario Alexander, Brandon Gibson and Austin Pettis, Lloyd couldn't do everything.
And with Lloyd gone, the Rams need someone who can fill his spot, and Johnson would be perfect for the role.
Johnson is the big-name player that the Rams need. He would instantly be the No. 1 receiver, a role he hasn't been in since he left the Bengals. Johnson would also be in a leadership role, which may help his behavioral problem.
The Rams could also get him at a very low price. Johnson doesn't have a lot of options, and he will have to take a pay cut if he wants to be in the NFL this upcoming season. The Rams could be an attractive landing spot because of their potential, and they have the role Johnson needs.
Sure, Johnson may be a media nightmare for an NFL team. But if the Rams can get him for the right price, Johnson may find success. And if he becomes a problem, the Rams can cut him just like the Dolphins did.
It's a low-risk, high-reward situation for the Rams. A situation they should take full advantage of.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?