October 6, 200817 yr So you're basically saying that Benson was a great running back in little league, junior high, high school and college but has been a bust in the pros. Got it. :thumb: So far he has been, I have not said he hasn't been. I mean its kind of surprising to me that he didn't do good there. Chicago has had such a good history of producing good running back ever since Walter Peyton. If players want to be good offensive players, Chicago is definitely the place to be, because players always do good on offense in Chicago...:sssh:
October 6, 200817 yr I am done now though. I got more important things to worry about at this moment. Maybe I will get on later to discuss this more. But I think I will just wait to watch it play out, and I look forward to hearing you all say I was right later.
October 6, 200817 yr So far he has been, I have not said he hasn't been. I mean its kind of surprising to me that he didn't do good there. Chicago has had such a good history of producing good running back ever since Walter Peyton. If players want to be good offensive players, Chicago is definitely the place to be, because players always do good on offense in Chicago...:sssh: Thomas Jones rushed for 1335 yards in 2005 when Kyle Orton with 1800 yards was the Bears leading passer. He also rushed for 1200 yards the next season with Grossman as their quarterback. Benson's career high? 674. He's soft, lazy and injury-prone having never played a full season. If the Bengals are banking on him to turn their season around or to become a featured back it's going to be more of the same.
October 6, 200817 yr Didn't they trade down twice? They got Andrews and then also Deltha? Also Franchising Andrews was not that bad of an idea, he is still very young and is going to be a good RT for years to come. (With that said, I don't they should have released Anderson.) Also the Bengals were not the only team who though Perry was a late 1st round guy or early second round back at worst. Most teams had Perry around that range. So people didn't they he was just a 3rd down back. However at the time Perry was the perfect fit for the Bengals offense. They needed that change of pace back at the time, and evetually would become a #1 guy. If he hadnt been injured so much, he probably would be doing better at that job this year, than he has. By the way how is Steven Jackson doing now for the Rams? He didn't have the best season last year, and well this year I haven't really heard to much from him either. He has had only one good year correct? You are NOT comparing Chris Perry and Steven Jackson. Tell me you're not!! You're defense of the Bengals and thier woeful personnel decisions is pretty amusing:lol:
October 7, 200817 yr You are NOT comparing Chris Perry and Steven Jackson. Tell me you're not!! You're defense of the Bengals and thier woeful personnel decisions is pretty amusing:lol: Ironically, the Rams are one of the few teams that I feel confident Cincinnati would beat.
October 7, 200817 yr You are NOT comparing Chris Perry and Steven Jackson. Tell me you're not!! You're defense of the Bengals and thier woeful personnel decisions is pretty amusing:lol: Trust me I am getting a good laugh out of this as well. At the time, it was not a dumb decision at all. No one knew for sure who would end up being the better back. Please don't tell me you did, because if you did, then you need to start running an NFL team. 20 something NFL teams passed up on Jackson. Two teams traded down when they could have got them, the Bengals and the Cowboys. So basically only one team made the right decision on Jackson. So no I am not comparing the two right now, because well Jackson is better. I won't argue with you on that one. However at the time, it was not so clear cut that Jackson was better. And as I said at the time the bengals trading down, getting more picks, and a guy to help their bad secondary at the time, really made a lot of sense. And they still got a guy in Perry that all the teams had rated high just like Jackson. I mean we could go through a long list every single year about teams who missed out on certain players, when they should have taken someone else. No one ever knows how someone will turn out until they have played in the Pros. So its easy for people to say, yeah should have done this. But at the time, it was a pretty darn good decision. It just didn't play out right, because of injuries.
October 7, 200817 yr I am done now though. I got more important things to worry about at this moment. Maybe I will get on later to discuss this more. But I think I will just wait to watch it play out, and I look forward to hearing you all say I was right later. Fair enough. To bring this debate to a polite conclusion, I will (begrudgingly) agree to acknowledge you were correct in the extremely unlikely event that Benson turns out to be anything more than a miserable one-night stand with the Bengals. Which, of course, he will be. But please don't go looking for such a statement the first time Benson rolls off a gain of 20 yards or inadvertently trips over the goal line. :creepy: He has to legitimately earn it.
October 7, 200817 yr Fair enough. To bring this debate to a polite conclusion, I will (begrudgingly) agree to acknowledge you were correct in the extremely unlikely event that Benson turns out to be anything more than a miserable one-night stand with the Bengals. Which, of course, he will be. But please don't go looking for such a statement the first time Benson rolls off a gain of 20 yards or inadvertently trips over the goal line. :creepy: He has to legitimately earn it. Oh I know. I wouldn't say anything just because of one good run, or one good game. He will have to do good consistently! :thumb:
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.