Quote:Bengals put the tag on Michael Johnson

March, 1, 2013
2:29PM ET

By Jamison Hensley | ESPN.com

The Cincinnati Bengals announced they have put the franchise tag on defensive end Michael Johnson and not offensive tackle Andre Smith, a tough decision that is a mild surprise but makes sense in many ways.

While there was speculation that Smith was the favorite to get the tag (I believed that as well), the Bengals chose to put the $11.175 million tag on Johnson. The deadline to use the tag is Monday.

There are a couple ways to interpret the Bengals' decision. They could see Johnson as the more valuable talent or the more irreplaceable player (there are more offensive tackles available than pass-rushers). Or perhaps Cincinnati feels it has a better chance of reaching a long-term deal with Smith.

My take is the Bengals have enough salary-cap room -- the most in the NFL, in fact -- to keep both players and should be able to outbid anyone if they truly want to keep Smith. He was the best right tackle in football last season. If the Bengals keep the tag on Johnson this season, the move forces Johnson to prove himself again by keeping him for one more year with the tag instead of investing a long-term deal in him.

Johnson had a breakout season with 11.5 sacks in 2012. There has to be a concern whether or not Johnson peaked in a contract year. His 2012 sack total nearly doubled his previous career high of six. The Bengals could still strike a long-term agreement with Johnson, but the tag gives them the choice to see if Johnson can produce the same way again.

Still, the Bengals don't have a great history when it comes to the franchise tag. Before using the tag on kicker Mike Nugent in 2012, the previous three players tagged by the Bengals -- defensive lineman Justin Smith, offensive lineman Stacy Andrew and kicker Shayne Graham -- have departed the following season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_...el-johnson

Smart decision. It would be much tougher to keep Johnson around than it would be Smith. If they can't keep Smith, there's a lot more options that are going to be on the market too.

I guessed earlier that Johnson would get it, but I partially disagree with Hensley (and coop). I think Smith is more valuable and they really need to lock him up long-term for that reason more than it possibly being easier than doing so with Johnson. You don't let arguably the best RT in football get away when he just turned 26 if you can possibly help it.

As hard as it has been for the Bengals to find a pass rusher, Johnson is more replaceable imo on this team. I'd rather sign Atkins and Dunlap to long term deals if it comes down to it at this point. This way they bought a year of Johnson (if they don't get a long-term deal with him this off-season anyway) to see if he can keep it up as Hensley talks about - remember he was billed as an under-achiever in the draft. Meanwhile they'll know more about where they stand with Atkins and Dunlap along with other finances and can adjust accordingly.