Potential Bills Free Agent: WR Bryant Johnson
![]() |
|
|
What is the Buffalo Bills' biggest need this off-season? This community says it's neck-and-neck between defensive tackle and wide receiver; needless to say, there are a huge amount of Bills fans who would like nothing more to see the Bills add a wide receiver this off-season.
Perhaps the most speculated-about potential wideout signing is Bryant Johnson of the Arizona Cardinals. The former Penn State star is a former first-round pick with loads of talent, but he's been stuck working as a backup behind two excellent Cardinals receivers in Anquan Boldin and Larry Fitzgerald. He has all the tools of a potentially elite threat, but a combination of being buried on the depth chart and some inconsistency have kept him in his reserve role. Still, his potential is high enough to make him one of the hottest names when it comes to free agent receivers. It may take a rather large contract to lure Johnson away from other potential starting roles.
The Big Red Sheet's Take
Jeff Gollin, a long-time friend of SB Nation and who has helped us with Cardinals information in the past, is the administrator of a Cardinals site called The Big Reed Sheet. He was very quick in getting back to us about Johnson; he's seen Johnson's career unfold from a far closer perspective than we can muster, making his information invaluable:
Clearly, the Cardinals have a lot invested at the wide receiver position. Have there been any indications that the club would like to keep Johnson?
They would, but the feeling is that we'll have to let him test the market and he may find a more attractive offer than we can afford to make.
Johnson was a first-round draft pick but was passed on the depth chart by Anquan Boldin and a younger Larry Fitzgerald. Is he starting material behind better talent, or is he best suited to what his role was in Arizona?
He's big and physical and sometimes will make the clutch catch, but lacks the consistency to be a really good #1 or #2 receiver.
What does Johnson do best (i.e. route-running, deep threat, etc.)? What areas does he need to work on?
He's more of a big, physical route runner than he is a burner. He needs to be more consistent - i.e. he needs to make a higher percentage of big plays when called upon.
Discussion Time
There are pros to Johnson's game. I like the fact that he's had starting experience (he started eight games last year while Boldin was injured), and he's been semi-productive (career high: 49 receptions) as the Cardinals' third option. He's big, quick enough to get open, and can make clutch plays. I just don't know if he's explosive enough to throw big money at.
I'll concede that Johnson is a very talented receiver with the size (6'3", 216) that the Bills would like to incorporate into their offense. I just haven't been sold on his being the answer to the Bills' #2 wideout problem, let alone his being the top option available. He's young and has plenty of room to improve, but Jeff's comments about his inconsistency are reinforcing my original belief. I certainly would not mind the Bills signing Johnson - because I think his skills complement Lee Evans' extremely well - I just hope the Bills don't try to out-spend a more desperate team for his services. With other options (Wilford, Hackett) available, Johnson certainly isn't the only answer to the Bills' question marks at wideout. I'm sure many of you have differing opinions, however.
I'd love to hear your thoughts not only on Johnson and his impending free agency, but how you'd like to see these bios/interviews structured as we move forward. Be sure to check out our free agent database, a one-stop shop where you can track all of these interviews. Have at it, folks.
|
|
||||||
| Year | G | Rec | Yds | Avg | TD | FL |
| 2003 | 15 | 35 | 438 | 12.5 | 1 | 1 |
| 2004 | 16 | 49 | 537 | 11.0 | 1 | 0 |
| 2005 | 14 | 40 | 432 | 10.8 | 1 | 0 |
| 2006 | 16 | 40 | 740 | 18.5 | 4 | 0 |
| 2007 | 16 | 46 | 528 | 11.5 | 2 | 0 |
| TOT | 77 | 210 | 2675 | 12.7 | 9 | 1 |
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
as long as
Just so Im aware of it, who else in the league will be looking for a #2 reciever? Do we actually have a good shot at acquiring one of these guys.
Tons
Atlanta, Baltimore, Carolina, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Indianapolis (if Harrison retires), Jacksonville, Kansas City, Miami, Minnesota, NY Giants, NY Jets... OK, I think you've got the point.
Wideout is one of those positions where teams are always looking for talent, unless you've got a lot invested in the position like the Pats, Lions, Cardinals. There's going to be a lot of competition for these not-quite-awesome free agents, which is why they'll all make more money than they should.
by Brian Galliford on Feb 13, 2008 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
teams looking for WR
To me a football contract confuses me.
In football, every one is deeming a bad contract because of what? Too long of years, too much money, or both? If we were to offer a reciever like Johnson a 5 year deal at 55 mil is that a bad contract? In three years when football contracts get even more expensive are we going to look at this contract and say, "Well it doesn't like too bad now."
I guess Im just confused because nobody here is throwing out numbers and years. What kind of contract would you give to Hackett, Johnson or Wilford(seeing how they are pretty close in most people's minds)? I'd think the lowest would be 5 4 years 40 mil and the highest 5 yrs. 55. Just looking for some input because football contracts are not my thing.
Am I reading this correct?
I appreciate the proactive thinking with regard to the cap. I applaud it. But that is way out of line for what any of the FA WRs this year are going to make.
If the Bills were to spend ten million a year on a WR, then he better catch 100 passes for 14-16 TDs for 1500 yards. He also better have the final plans for a new Peace Bridge, as well as the ticket to developing the waterfront.
In perspective
Like I said,
Well, Im now aware that the franchise tag is 7.6 mil. I understand this F.A. class isn't spectacular but they are better than what we have and a couple guys might be better options than what is available draft wise. Im basing that on the quickest impact and not long term.
I dunno, whatever we do, Im not going to make a hissy fit as long as they don't sign joe Scmow.
Johnson
IF, and it's a big IF, Johnson's contract demands are reasonable, I'd be happy to have him. But if he is out there going after #1 WR money, then let him go after it elsewhere. He's not that good of a player.
I have a feeling
I do like him the best, but not at the price tag he will most likely comand.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, I agree with K.
this is why...
It's not often that a trade presents an opportunity to have a better cost/benefit value then free agency. This is definitely one of those situations. Hopefully the Bills keep this in mind.
What's #1 WR money?
And then, what do you think Evans is going to shoot for after this year?

by 




















