John Grieshop - Getty Images
5 months ago: CINCINNATI, OH - JANUARY 01: Ray Lewis #52 and Terrell Suggs #55 of the Baltimore Ravens tackle Cedric Benson #32 of the Cincinnati Bengals during their game at Paul Brown Stadium on January 1, 2012 in Cincinnati, Ohio. The Ravens defeated the Bengals 24-16. (Photo by John Grieshop/Getty Images)
Cedric Benson very well could be playing his final game as the Cincinnati Bengals feature back this weekend in Houston. His five fumbles this year is tied for most amongst running backs (Ryan Matthews) according to NFL.com. Additionally Benson has failed to surpass a four-yard-per-rush average in all but five games this season. You know the story and that irritating feeling when Benson runs the ball straight into his own lineman for a no-gain on third and short.
According to Football Outsiders, which takes a deep examination into a player's performances beyond the mainstream statistics, Benson was one of the most overrated players in the NFL in 2011.
Benson had a 1,000-yard season for a playoff team. He has to be pretty good, right? Not really. Benson had lots of yards because he had lots of carries, but on a per-play basis he was probably hurting his team. In that way, 2011 looked a lot like most other recent Benson years. Benson has been one of the worst starting running backs in the league for four of the past five years; the exception was 2009, when he was slightly above average. This year, Benson averaged just 3.90 yards per carry and ranked 45th in Football Outsiders' DVOA metric; he was 39th in 2010. He's also not a good receiver, gaining fewer than 4.0 yards per pass target.
0 recs | 153 comments
I originally didn't want to draft a running back very high in this years draft......
but I’m feeling more and more like it’s not a bad idea. With Ball going back to school and Polk projecting sometime in the 2nd (now moving up without Ball) and Richardson not likely falling to us…..Lamar Miller is looking more and more like our 1b pick in the draft. Obviously to some degree it’s the line, but I think it’s equally Benson’s poor running.
The Van Buren Boys - January 6, 2012
i've seen a few mocks
where Richardson has fallen to us at 17th…..and honestly it made sense in all the mocks i’ve seen….of course you can’t factor in teams that woudl trade up for him
i REALLY want him, and until last week thought we had no shot, but if he’s there- we gotta take him. then go CB as the 2nd 1st rounder, and gaurd in the 2nd round
TruWhoDey - January 6, 2012
Have seen a lot of them too and agree it's possible but not likely.....
several of those drafts aren’t updated to show a lot of the guys who have recently decided to return to school. So everyone essentially moves up a spot and the need for running backs is greater each time one of them drops out (Ball). Would love for us to snag DeCastro and Richardson together, but don’t think we’re going to get that lucky. But you never know what could happen between now and the combine, then the draft.
The Van Buren Boys - January 6, 2012
If he makes it out of the top 5 there's a realistic chance
A LOT of teams between 5 and 17 either already have very very good franchise backs or have MUCH bigger needs. So unless someone like Cleveland chooses to go with him over figuring out their QB/WR issue, it’s possible. The one really roadblock I see is the Jets at #16. If he starts falling past #10 we should look into trading up a few spots. Shouldn’t be too costly.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
We ABSOLUTELY HAVE to take one of these 3 backs this year...My ranking in order
Isaiah Pead
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI05AJRcD2I
Lamar Miller
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVoKjbx3QC4
Chris Polk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o46hjBKtNw8
ticalcaldwell - January 6, 2012
I left out Richardson because I highly doubt he will make it to us
ticalcaldwell - January 6, 2012
Give me Pead and I'll be ecstatic
Diesel2405 - January 6, 2012
Although Polk is looking quite beastly
Diesel2405 - January 6, 2012
pead has speed and hands
oh and he played at some local college..
getting Bush or LT or Slaton plus Pead in the draft would make me very happy.
palewook - January 6, 2012
miller is a little speedy pinball with hands
palewook - January 6, 2012
Polk and Pead both run pretty upright which may not be a good thing.
I like both of them, but I like Lamar Miller a lot more. Also David Wilson could be a good option. Speedy back with some good power.
Luke - January 6, 2012
I saw Polk
At the Alamo Bowl and he does run straight up. Kind of reminds me of Rudy with more speed and hands.
Bigcatdaddy - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I love Isaiah Pead!!! I bet Marvin and staff have a hard eye on this kid being as he's played
in PBS a few times. If he has any sort of a good character, I am sure they have their sights on this kid in the 2nd (If he’s still there).
On a side note, please watch the above Isaiah Pead highlight video and go to 3:02 and watch the defender literally quit on the play. He could have tackled Pead on the 5 and literally tried to not tackle him. I wonder if this is college gambling spread fixing.
Check it out.
BevHillsWhoDey - January 6, 2012
I just got done watching a bunch of highlights
The 3 you posted, Trent Richardson and David Wilson. I want Trent in stripes BAD. However, regardless of our little mock (which was fun and we should do another but need more people involved too!) that AMAS85 posted, he may not fall to us. If we don’t get Richardson, I think I really want Wilson in stipes! Granted all of these are highlights so you don’t see all the plays but this kid was almost as hard to bring down as Richardson. Here’s the David Wilson Highlight video that I watched. The person who made the video also put some Logan Thomas runs in at the end, but most of it is David Wilson. I think I’m going to go watch it again now.
Oregonbengalsfan - January 7, 2012
Not to say I don't like these 3 guys either
just that I think Wilson is my 2nd choice after Richardson.
Oregonbengalsfan - January 7, 2012
If you get Pead, and people give him the standard nickname of the first letter of his first name, with the first three letters of his last name…that would be awesome
FrankWyt - January 7, 2012
Landry Jones is returning to school next year, unfortunately, that moves all the draft picks up a spot.
DTFCPDX - January 6, 2012
POLK!!!!!
he made his yards behind a suspect line so you know he can do it..
Ball is a product of his OL
Bengalsfan024 - January 6, 2012
Ball is returning anyway
I would go with Lamar Miller, but I also like Polk. Lamar Miller has more of a HR ability yet is big enough to run between the tackles.
C1ncy4Life - January 6, 2012
I like Polk. I hate Ball.
I love Pead
Diesel2405 - January 6, 2012
wow I like Polk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEafHF0IwqU
ticalcaldwell - January 6, 2012
he doesn't really break tackles
he steps out of them. elusiveness gets points in my book.
palewook - January 6, 2012
I have been saying Lamar Miller
fast, quick feet, a little undersized though…I love him though
ticalcaldwell - January 6, 2012
duh...
This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who follows the Bengals.
CBJKing - January 6, 2012
The point was about the draft constantly changing shape and dictating to some degree who you target and where.....
that is the point I was trying to make. Originally I didn’t want Miller that high with our second pick in the first, but now with Ball being gone and Polk not possibly being there for us in the second our hand might be forced.
The Van Buren Boys - January 6, 2012
I agree with your points
I was talking about the original Football Outsiders article
CBJKing - January 6, 2012
Gotcha, Benson is frustrating me now.......and the games not for another 24 hours+! lol
The Van Buren Boys - January 6, 2012
Hopefully we get a back in FA so we don't have to draft a RB early.
http://www.theredzone.org/showposition.aspx?position=RB
There are about 11 guys on that list who could come here and start and I will be happy.
Grizzlyfox - January 6, 2012
Lynch would be insane
But I think the Seahawks will lock him up…but it would be sweet
ticalcaldwell - January 6, 2012
Michael Bush?
ddbumpus - January 6, 2012
bush seems to be the choice in fa that some fans are agreeing on
as much as getting forte, ray, or hillis (for some fans) would seem to be the perfect fit. the fact remains, those teams are not letting those backs hit the fa market. bush in oakland has taken some of the blame from fans for this season. his sub 4 yard per carry might be part of the reason oakland lets bush hit the fa market. another part is money, the raiders were bumping against the 120 million cap before last season started. needed to borrow against 2012 to get 126 million last season.
palewook - January 6, 2012
I'd take Bush
We can still grab a back in the draft to develop. Depending on who is available maybe a second or third round pick, but it would have to be BPA.
If we are able to sign Bush and a G it opens up a lot of our draft to focus on solely taking BPA.
C1ncy4Life - January 6, 2012
bush if he's cheap
3-5 million a year plus a few incentives. 1-3 year deal and we start looking towards the 2013 draft for our rb.
palewook - January 6, 2012
slightly offtopic, but Bush can't shoulder the load of a full season.
he’d need to be a tandem back with Bscott. Thats a perfect situation, netiher are feature backs
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
Personally,,,
I’d want a rookie or first year running back to go with this squad. They are all young, and someone like that could grow with them, not bring whatever baggage they have with them when they come..
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
personally..
i want jim anderson to get whoever he wants, no bargain bin signings.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Not a chance Lynch is leaving Seattle
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
hope not
Lynch is a more extreme Benson. He is invisible for a few games, then suddenly he goes into beast mode and looks like the best RB ever. Then he disappears for a few more games.
He’s better than Benson, but I’d like someone who gives consistent effort.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
The only guy I'd be serious about going after is Bush
And I still think we’d be better off using that money to go after Carl Nicks or George Yanda and then drafting a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round. Nicks or Yanda will make every phase of our offense better, and if we could also draft DeCastro or Glenn then our run blocking would go from well below average to suddenly one of the best in the league in an instant. Not to mention Andy would have one of the most solid pass-blocking lines out there. And if you’re going after a Monte Ball or Isaiah Pead, it’s not like you’re going slumming at your skill position. I think either of those guys could be better than Bush right away, especially with a great line.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
+1
AMAS85 - January 6, 2012
I think you mean Marshall Yanda, but I agree
He may look like the gerber baby, but the dude is a difference-maker on the o-line. I’d love for the Bengals to take him from the Thugs.
There are generally a lot of good RBs that can succeed in the NFL given the right situation. In last year’s draft I wanted Roy Helu in the 3rd or Evan Royster in the 6th. Both of those guys went to the Redskins and both carried the load in multiple games and put up great numbers. I knew Helu would be awesome, wasn’t completely sure about Royster. I figured he would have been a third round pick before the rules changed to pass-first, so now would be available in the last round or two. He started the last 2 games for the ’Skins and had 39 carries for 245 yards, over 6ypc.
This year will probably be the same. All the talk will be about Richardson, but there will probably be at least 5 or 6 guys that aren’t first round projections that get a shot and make the most of it.
If we can bring in Yanda to play LG, move Tubby to RG, and let Collins start at RT, Kyle Cook becomes the weak link on the line. And he’s pretty decent. Behind that line we could pick a RB in the 2nd or 3rd round and be just fine. Or we could potentially grab Richardson late in the 1st and have a good, balanced attack.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
Why do I keep calling him George?
I’ve done that like 10 times now. I think there’s a better chance of Nicks being available than Yanda, but Nicks is probably a hair better anyway, especially in pass blocking. Either way, if you got one of those guys AND Trent Richardson? Yikes. Or one of those guys + DeCastro plus ANYONE? We’re in pretty good shape to vastly improve the offense this offseason and it shouldn’t take any mind blowing moves.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
Maybe you're thinking of George Blanda?
Offensive Brute - January 6, 2012
bush wont demand top 15 rb dollars
something in the bottom 20 nfl starting rb dollars. signing a quality guard in fa should cost more.
montee ball is off the table, he’s staying in college for his senior season =(
palewook - January 6, 2012
This just in...
Montee Ball announced today he’s staying at Wisconsin for another year. That’s bad news…it bumps up all of the 2nd tier RB’s. I think that might mean we HAVE to use our 2nd rounder on a RB now because the pickings could be slim by the bottom of the 3rd. Pead will almost definitely be gone by then, along with Miller, Polk, James…
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
i actually feel like it means we have to bite the bullet
sign bush for a 1 year incentive laden deal in 2012 while waiting on montee in 2013.
palewook - January 6, 2012
What about Polk?
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
only rb move i'll be upset about in 2012
we resign benson and do nothing else. polk is fine if we can sneak him into the 3rd
palewook - January 6, 2012
I wouldn't mind Polk in the 2nd
1a = DeCastro/Cordy Glenn to play RG (Big Bobbie is a FA).
1b = Janoris Jenkins (would have been a top 10 pick if not for off-field issues which will likely scare most teams and cause him to slid to the bottom half of the first round.
2 = Chris Polk = a very, very tough runner who can also catch effectively out of the backfield
Plus, the big signing of Carl Nicks in FA to fill the glaring and gaping hole at LG (see posy below!)
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
Bush is 28 (or close to it). I agree with your earlier post about RBs declining at 27-28.
And even though Bush likely would not command top dollar on the FA market, why spend that money on him??
I do like your suggestion about going after Carl Nicks. I have been advocating this for the past couple of months (yes, months, look at my posts), and I feel a Nicks acquisition will accomplish MANY positive things for this team and organization, both on and off the field. First, Carl Nicks is widely regarded as the premier LG in the NFL. His superb run blocking is even outweighed by his abilities as a truly elite pass protector. The Saints, too, will have a VERY, VERY tough time retaining Nicks. Brees is a FA and the Sainst will definitely devote a ton of their 2012 (and beyond) payroll to him. Likewise, Colsten is also an unrestricted FA, and even though the Saints are loaded at WR and TE, it is likely that they will retain Brees’ favorite target (although Jimmy Graham is quickly becoming Brees’ favorite target, too). With these two prized unrestricted FAs, the Saints are likely to let LG Carl Nicks test the FA market – Please gobble him up Bengals Front Office!!!). I say the Sainst are likely to let Nicks test the FA market because they just signed their other Prow Bowl guarg – RG Jahri Evans – to a 7 year, $60M extension two years ago. With that, it is very hard to imagine that the Saints would devote so much of their payroll to two guards. Yes, Nicks and Evans are unquestionably the two best OG’s in the NFL, but it would be a very tough strain on the Saints’ salary cap to sing Nicks to a similar deal as Evans (in fact, Nicks may command more money).
Nicks is still only 26 years old, and signing him to say a 7-year/$65M deal (with close to $35M guaranteed) would be wondrous for this team and organization. Nicks would still only be 33 years old at the end of the proposed 7-year deal (Remember, Bobbie Williams played OG until age 35+).
Team wise:
Imagine a 2012 staring O-line consisting of Whitowrth, Nicks, Cook, (DeCastro/Cordy Glenn), and Andre Smith!!!! Best o-line in pro football.
A RB from the GCL may gain 1,000+ yards behind that line! Furthermore, the New Franchise (i.e. Andy Dalton), gets another top-nothc personal protector, and the Bengals get the best LG in football who has playoff experience and a SuperBowl ring!! Also, by signing him to more than $9M+/season, it would make Nicks the highest paid OG (his agent is definitely looking for that), but it wouldn’t “ruffle” and lockerroom feathers, as Whitworth would still be making more than Nicks on a per year basis (Whitworth’s extension guarantees him $10M+/season).
Now lets beat the Texans on Saturday!!!
Who Dey
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
we spend big on a guard in fa and gamble on a later round rb in the draft
i can live with that.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Agree
Also, from an Organizational perspective (forgot to mention that in the earlier post):
If Nicks signs on the first couple of days of FA, and the Bengals hold his introductory press conference. What better way for the Bengals FO to send a clear message to all fans about their commitment to winning following a playoff season literally NO ONE expected.
MB and ML walk in with Big Carl, and say, “We just singed the best interior lineman in all of professional football. We are committed to protecting our QB, we are committed to further establishing an offensive identity, and now I’ll turn it over to Carl”.
A man can dream, right??
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
that
gives me chills. Please let that happen. Nicks or Yanda, I’d prefer Yanda since it would take him from Baltimore.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
We're probably looking at a Jahri Evans like deal for signing Carl Nicks then.
5 or 6 year $70 mil
DTFCPDX - January 6, 2012
The Saints extended Jahri Evans - 7 years, $57M - thus, making him the highest paid OG in the NFL
Nicks is a couple of years younger (and some would argue slightly better), so I would have no problem signing him to a 7-year $65+Million deal. Nicks is only 26, meaning he will still only be 33 at the END of the proposed deal (OGs can play effectively well into their mid-30s – look no further than Big Bobbie, and Carl Nicks is way, way better than Big Bobbie).
I would offer a 7 year $65-$70M deal to Nicks the first minute FA begins (i.e. 12:00AM EST March 3rd), and would not think twice about doing so.
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
Agree with most of this
Bush makes sense because he’s not going to command top tier RB money, yet he’s a significant improvement over our current RB’s. Ball is returning for his senior year, but a RB in the 3rd round would be nice to develop.
Lastly, I couldn’t agree more with improving the OL. We need atleast 1 stud G now and likely 2. An improved OL would obviously help the Run game but it would also help the passing game. We would have the ability to send Gresh out in more passing routes while giving Dalton more time to survey the field. Obviously that’s not even factoring in how an improved Run Game opens up Play Action and draws the extra defenders up in the box. OL should be our #1 priority this offseason, IMO.
C1ncy4Life - January 6, 2012
alexander should be in browns office pounding on the desk for real guard in fa
and one in the draft.
palewook - January 6, 2012
For the most part I think signing free agent running backs is a bad idea
Especially with the new CBA rookie scale. First of all, I’m guessing most of the guys on that list you’d want aren’t going anywhere. And the ones that will be leaving their current teams will be doing so because of their salary demands. The problem with signing top FA running backs is you’re usually getting them right at or right after their peak. Which means you have to pay top dollar for maybe a year of peak performance and then have 2-3 more years of decline. In this day and age, a rookie RB can come into the league and start from day one for pennies on the dollar. Draft Montee Ball in the 2nd round and he could easily be just as efective as Michael Bush or even Matt Forte, and he’ll cost you less than a 10th what you’d pay for either of those guys…and he’ll cost that for at least a few years. Most RB’s are starting to get worn out by 27. Get them when they’re young, develop them, then ride them into the ground and let someone else pay for their twilight years. We don’t have to be that someone.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
Make your OLine
and your OL will make your RB…
I was upset when we brought him back after last year
Bengalsfan024 - January 6, 2012
montee ball is staying in college another year
while it might be a better deal to draft a rb, we’re going to have to use fa and the draft to address some of these holes. consider what we need in just starters we have to find in the off season:
guard (williams is a fa)
guard
running back (benson is a fa)
wr (simpson is a fa)
ss (crocker/mays./sands – see any issues here)
fs (nelson is fa)
cb (need a true #1 again. jones and jennings are also FAs)
palewook - January 6, 2012
Yeah I just saw that
My suggestion all along has been sign a top FA receiver and guard, draft a WR high.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
Er...draft a RB high.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
glad you cleared that up
with cincy having a history of drafting a high wr, wasn’t quite sure what you wanted there =)
palewook - January 6, 2012
Although...
If Alshon Jeffery is there at 17 do you consider it?
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
we're drafting Janoris Jenkins in the 1st
he’s got the right pedigree we look for in our high picks…
palewook - January 6, 2012
It should be Decastro and Jenkins with our 2 first round picks
Anything else is a failure
Diesel2405 - January 6, 2012
Would absolutely LOVE if this happens
Decastro (or even Cordy Glenn – the guy is a versatile o-lineman – played LT, LG and RG – and just mauls people in the running game) and Jenkins in the first round instantly upgrades this team!!!
Would love if this happened. Would also love to sign unrestricted FA LG Carl Nicks – see post above as to why this is a very real possibility!!
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
Well that's a sunny outlook...
Especially since it’s VERY possible both of those guys are gone by 17. I’d take any combination of Jenkins, DeCastro, Dennard, Miller, Glenn, or Barron with the first two picks. Throw in Trent Richardson too but I dont’ think he’ll be there.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
with jenkins off the field issues
any gm that takes him with a top 15 pick is looking to get fired if jenkins starts screwing up in the nfl.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Wouldn't be the first time.
If Jenkins is gone, Dennard should be there and vice versa.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
Mike Brown getting fired???????????
DTFCPDX - January 6, 2012
bengals dont have a top 15 pick
nor do they have a hired gm.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Would be fine with me. Janoris is also a very explosive kickoff and punt returner
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
Not after is Bowl Game fight!!
I do NOT want WRs with any semblance of “Me first” attitude. Getting ejected in your team’s bowl game is the height of selfishness!! Even though his team ultimately won the game, it was selfish!
No diva WRs (especially those prone to throw punches). Anyone recall Chad’s (alleged) punch at halftime of the 2005 WC loss to Pittsburgh??
I’ll pass on Alshon.
1a = DeCastro/Cordy Glenn
1b = Janoris Jenkins
The_Black_Stripes - January 6, 2012
Well played!!
I am LAW1951 and I approve this message!!!!
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
But you don't have any problem with Jenkins' character issues?
Just saying. I don’t think Jeffery has any history of that sort of thing. Him and Dennard were getting into it the whole game…it was a big game.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
jenkins is the poster child for character issues in the 2012 draft
palewook - January 6, 2012
Good players on that list
Maybe B. Green-Ellis could be a good replacement for Benson. The kid has good size, speed, and god knows they don’t wear him out up there. I was thinking maybe R. Brown but I don’t know about him. Slaton would be an okay #2 in a WC offense.
Bigcatdaddy - January 6, 2012 via mobile
slaton has great hands
for a hands back, i looked at the rb fa list like 2 weeks ago, was shocked at how much the rb receptions dropped off once i got past the top 3 rbs. who were the top hands backs not named forte or rice?
LT and Slaton.
palewook - January 6, 2012
When he played in Houston
They even split him out wide and he was a killer on screens. I watched him quite a bit that year and I’m not sure what happened after that. I want to say fumble problems or just depth chart. I would take him over Scott any day. I’m going to go over and ask BRB about him.
Bigcatdaddy - January 6, 2012 via Android app
Slaton is with the dolphins now
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
he's a fa in 2012
palewook - January 6, 2012
i was going to say this in my first post but didnt want to be mean...
he sucks now.
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
I know he is with the dolphins
That’s why it said WHEN he was in Houston and yes he is a FA that’s what we were talking about. I was curious as to why the cut him. He’s a good hands back and might make a decent #2 in a WC system.
Bigcatdaddy - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I’m not a benson fan by all means! But that is what your taught. When it is 3rd in short, tuck your head and ball, and take quickest route up field which is straight. If he doesn’t take the route he is supposed to he’s hit for a two yard loss instead of a no gain or just shy of first down. Benson is not a shifty RB. His job is to hit the hole that is made for him.(which if you look their is never a hole) I don’t like benson and hope we get a better back soon but it’s not all his fault! We def could use a high dose of Scott this week.
Bengalsredsvictim - January 6, 2012 via mobile
are you Benson's mom?
Supposedly Benson is a power back. On the front page of SI right now there’s a link to an article by Kerry Byrne where Benson is referred to as a “battering ram”. How often does Benson move the pile? When is the last time you saw him carry a defender past the first down marker?
He’s a speed back with mediocre speed. Durability is his only real benefit. Considering that he’s missed games due to injury or suspension almost every year, even that is questionable.
I really think there are at least 50 guys that would be more productive than Benson if they were given all his carries. He hasn’t done anything to prove he’s a feature back in the NFL. Since he was drafted he’s been nothing but a disappointment. In his best season ever, with the Bengals in 2009, he was just a little above mediocre. And that was his glory year!!
I’ve been wanting Benson gone since we signed him, and I’m glad I’m not the only one anymore.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
problem is
hes failing to do just that
Bengalsfan024 - January 6, 2012
he gets 1 yard
when he needs 2. gains 2 when he needs 3, etc.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Im not a fan
Of drafting a rb early. Look at Ingram down in NO. The rb position is different than most others. They can come in and perform quicker than other positions. The trick is to get the right fit for your team. For example, look again at NO and what they did w Sproles
quickslant - January 6, 2012 via mobile
you typically draft a guy early because of you need an upgrade at the position and someone who fits your system well
I think its still to early to know who we really go for because we don’t know if we will get both of our coordinators back. But asuming both come back, i think OG and CB will be a our main concerns in the first round.
AMAS85 - January 6, 2012
my favorite example of not needing an early draft pick to find a stub rb
arian foster was an UFA.
palewook - January 6, 2012
They ain't all Arian Fosters
The whole thing’s a crap shoot, but you can’t rely on striking gold like that.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
Yeah but
That’s one reason the RB position isn’t as sought after in the first round anymore.
Bigcatdaddy - January 6, 2012 via Android app
I think it's reasonably safe to look for a feature back in the 2nd-3rd rounds.
Takes a really special talent to go in the first. I think mark Ingram was a HUGE reach in the first for the Saints last year, and he’s pretty good. But a guy like Trent Richardson is a special talent. If he somehow lasts to 17 you almost have to take him. He’s in the top 3 on most draft boards. It would be the steal of the draft.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
+1
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
with the 26th pick of the 2004 draft
yeah i’d like to avoid that again. 2nd round or later works for me
palewook - January 6, 2012
I agree with this entire post
NCWhoDey1987 - January 6, 2012
Over rated ?
You must be kidding right ? How is ced over rated ?
He breaks every tackle and jukes would be tacklers out there shoes on every play.
He is always happy even when he is pulled from a play.
No way …. No way ….
Also… Please stop talking about micheal bush. Ive seen him play. No break away speed … no nothing. He needs huge holes to get thru and our line at this time does not do that.
so NEXT.
77CincyRage - January 6, 2012
lol
AMAS85 - January 6, 2012
not sure if he's joking on the Michael Bush part...
supergrover - January 6, 2012
bush is basically ced 4 years ago
palewook - January 6, 2012
Just draft Isiah Pead in the 3rd round and we will be good.
Diesel2405 - January 6, 2012
+1
Although witha good combine I think he gets up into the 2nd round. He looked flat out dominant in the Liberty Bowl.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
I like Pead in the 3rd
but I think we should take Richardson in the 1st too.
This must be Benson’s last season, but Scott has done less than Benson. We need 2 RBs in this offseason, whether it’s 1 FA, 1 draft, or 2 draft picks in the first 4 rounds.
jim0ijk - January 6, 2012
Benson gets the ball way too much
A back that cannot break tackles on inside runs and get to the second level should not be getting carries on 3rd and short yet he does. On Runs up the middle Scott is loads better.
The numbers do not lie. Scott is dramatically better up the middle last season and this year as well. Look at the stats on ESPN on inside runs of both players.
Benson cannot get to the outside and has ZERO big play ability.
Michael Bush is a great receiving back but just lacking the little things McFadden does was a reason the Raiders will be watching the Bengals from home.
If we are going to beat New England in the 2nd round Bernard most get the rock more than 10 times. We are 2-0 when Scott got the ball 10 times or more.
He fumbles less, has 5x the big play ability and is better up the gut.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012
exactly
I’ve been saying this for a couple years now. Scott actually tries to get yardage after contact, Benson doesn’t. Benson is a big name because he gets 1,000 yards, but that just means he has a starting job and doesn’t miss a lot of games to injury, it doesn’t mean he’s actually any good.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
Cedric Benchson
Get him off the field and pull Livings too. B. Scott needs to play more.
80%OFTHETIMEIMRIGHTEVERYTIME - January 6, 2012
9 versus 11. we will lose every time
supergrover - January 6, 2012
haha
CBJKing - January 6, 2012
I am not as down on Benson as others are, but I do think we need and upgrade to
a Sproles type runner. Unfortunately I don’t see an obvious one coming out this year, maybe Pead will work but I would prefer a more experienced FA if one is available. RBs are such unknown quantities. I would prefer to stay with positions such as OL or DB types whose performance is a bit more forseeable in the top 3 rounds. We need 4 of 5 real hits in the top of the draft who can come in and give us an upgrade right away and don’t take a full season to get their feet under them. No projects in the first 3 rounds.
JUNGLEJOHN - January 6, 2012
Scott>?
out ran Lewis and Reed to the endzone
Bengalsfan024 - January 6, 2012
he does need more playing time though
Bengalsfan024 - January 6, 2012
1 good run
He is averaging less per carry and catch than Benson. I know he has gotten fewer snaps, but if you want more snaps you have to take advantage of the ones you get.
jim0ijk - January 6, 2012
As you all know...
I have always supported Benson on this team. He was geared for it. And yes, he ain’t the fastest to the outside. When this year is over, it’s time for a change at this position. And I do agree with “FO” whe they say, “but on a per-play basis, he’s probably hurting his team”.
I keep reading that people would like to see Benard Scott featured in an every down capacity, but didn’t that experiment already fail in the Seattle game when he went 22 carries for only 76 yards??
For this season, We got, what we got boys and girls..
Deal with it now, then change after the season. Ask yourself, “Why isn’t Peerman running the hard yards”? or, why isn’t Leonard in more? It’s becaue the offense is designed a certain way to take advantage of the best assets we can put on the field now. That has been both how we’ve succeeded, and failed
-— THIS YEAR….I stand with what we are working with and will see it through.
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
I would have liked to have seen Leonard given a better shot towards mid-season
I agree that it’s FAR too late to change it up now, but I really feel like Leonard could be have a breakout season if he was just given a chance to touch the ball 15 times a game.
eric nyc - January 6, 2012
have you seen leonard carry the ball up the middle recently?
gets 3 yards every time
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
Madden once quoted Leroy Hoard when Hoard was in MIN
Hoard said – Ya need one yard I get you three. Ya need five yards, I get ya three.
Then he broke a 46 yard run against DAL.
Leonard is the same type of runner.
david in upstate SC - January 6, 2012
leonard is clutch
that’s something that doesn’t always show up on stats. you see it on the field. its like saying is wes welker one of the top 10 wrs in the nfl? nope. if the game was on the line and you needed a completion would welker be one of the first guys you would look for? yup.
palewook - January 6, 2012
To play devils advocate
Leonard is the 3rd down runningback. Therefore, if he succeeds at his job, he is getting the first down, and by definition clutch.
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
he got the job by being clutch
it wasnt a left over job and they handed it to leonard so he’d have something to do.
palewook - January 6, 2012
haha dont worry im just being devils advocate!
I love him too!
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
nice quote
love guys like that.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
i've been calling for an end to the scott experiment for at least half this season
i not only favor moving on from benson in the off season, but scott as well.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Scott isn't the answer
he isn’t great, but he’s every bit as good as Benson. The major difference between them is that Scott actually makes people miss, breaks tackles, and has speed on the outside.
If you took Benson’s first 5 runs of each game, I’d wager his ypc would be even worse than Scotts. In fact, that sounds like a fun project. I think I’ll work on that tonight.
indesignkat - January 6, 2012
No!
Look at Bensons road numbers last 2 years.
Seattle is a tough place to play. Scott did decent and protected the ball. He at least threatens defenses and gets those 3rd and short yards. He is heaps better at breaking tackles.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012 via mobile
+1
Seattle has one of the best run defenses in the NFL. dont misjudge what scott did that day
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
i'm not picking on scott b/c of one game in seattle
scott has spent 3 seasons in cincy. my doubts in scott have come from his inability to take the job away from benson. the offensive calls have hurt scott sometimes. and other times scott has shown no ability to break a tackle, catch a clutch pass, convert a down, or even be elusive.
the case for scott can be made looking at his 3 year stats in cincy, whose career totals now read like a possible 1 season as a starter:
247 att 1,000 yards 4.0 per carry 61long 4td 51first downs 1 fumbles
29 receptions 165 yards receiving
palewook - January 6, 2012
well i was talking to Law, but I think the coaching staff views Scott as a tandem back.
they might think That Scott can’t carry the burden of a full games 16 games, and that only Benson can take the bigger load.
Another possibility is thatthey don’t think Scott has matured as a runner enough yet.
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
i might be entirely off base here
my take on the bernard scott problem, the coaches are trying to make him a circle when he’s a square. the coaches have tried to use scott as a change of pace back without changing the offense to favor what scott’s abilities are. the bengals use scott like he’s benson.
palewook - January 6, 2012
+1
interesting theory
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
I think that is pretty much correct.
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
I also agree with this Pale.
JUNGLEJOHN - January 6, 2012
Law, obviously we need to play with what we have but....
we can and should change up how we play them. I would like to see Leonard a few more times but personell isn’t a realistic place to look for changes. I think they need to pull out some different schemes. Defenses have learned too much from film. The seem to know our plays better than our own players do at times. I am sure that Jay and ML have a few plays in the book that they havn’t had the wherewithall to pull out. If we come out with the same run first offense we will not win this game. When is the last time we fooled anyone? Probably the Benson 30+ run in the last Texans game. We seem to be running the same play out of the same formation too much. They see the formation and know the play. We have to stop depending on athleticism to pick up yards on plays that the opposition is ready for.
Gruden kind of reminds me of one hit wonders of the 60’s and 70’s. The work hard as a band and over several years and come up with 8-10 good songs and get attention and sell a lot of albums. Then they are out of material and try to write different stuff that ends up being inferior to what made them popular in the first place. When all of Gruden’s stuff was new it worked well and he just continues to ride it even after the opposition has caught up with it. If he has anything in his bag of tricks that he hasn’t used yet – now is the time. This is why I am not as enamoured with Gruden as everyone else seems to be. He brought some good stuff but I see it as possible that he is just out of shi*. He is looking more and more like a one hit wonder to me.
JUNGLEJOHN - January 6, 2012
I got to agree...
Certainly I think we all agree that the talent is there. But the last few games everyone was saying how predictable Gruden’s scheme has been – much like the old OC, He who shall not be named! Which also begs the question, “Is this really Marvin’s scheme”?
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
And also,,
I just think there is a possibl downside to our negative comments about our players here cause i imagine some, if not a lot of them “do” read what’s being said about them. How would you feel if your fan base was blasting you at a very critical time? I always like to think they are professionals, always trying to succeed in their endeavor, yet human and not oblivious to negative commentary. I want thei pysche to be right!!
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
How about the psyche of Scott
Knowing Marvin trusts one of the worst in the league with a fumbling problem over him.
Everyone needs a confidence boost and you have to wonder if Scott had a real opportunity to earn the job how good he would be.
The best thing about Benson is he was one of the reasons Carson left.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012
OK,,,
But if the coaching staff felt Scott was capable and a better fit than Benson, don’t you think they’d have played him more??
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
yup
palewook - January 6, 2012
You are talking about a poorly coached team offensively
if not for Zimmer and the D keeping us in games god only knows where we would be. it is pretty obvious Lewis has a “thing” for Benson.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012
I think they know how we feel about them.
I really don’t think they take us too seriously at all and frankly, we probably take ourselves a bit too seriously as well. There is so much going on behind the scenes and even the “OC who wust not be named” knows worlds more than we do. If they read these boards they will also know how much passion we have for this team even with our tough history. They have to see the pain we feel when they lose and the elation we feel when they win. I can’t really put myself in their position but I would like to think that if I were in their shoes that I would be motivated to prove the naysayers wrong and reward those loyal positive fans with the very best effort I could. I said I would like to think that of myself but where you stand on anything depende on where you sit. Right?
JUNGLEJOHN - January 6, 2012
LOL!
Absoutely…. Comments here make it seem like guys like Benson are not trying to do their best. Nothing could be further from the truth. They all want that ring and that title “Superbowl Champion”. It really comes down to where you are going, and that is that it’s the management’s assessments and decisions (or best guesses) that make the unit succeed or fail, as well as the plays that are called.
Heck, I’ve even seen Zim make some god awful defensive calls in situations. And even though they were wrong and we got smoked, I don’t hear people calling for “his” head. Instead, we hear the player getting called out. And granted, a lot of times it’s warranted caue they are out of position.
I’m good with this team this year.
All in all, the only game that really sticks in my craw was the TEXANS loss! And I ain’t getting over it until we beat them! Talk to you all after tomorrow! WHO DEY.
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
Good point
Marvin seems to be the worlds biggest Benson enabler.
Giving one of the worst backs a load fit for a stud back is something only a defensive coordinator could come up with.
Imagine NE giving Benson 20+ carries. The city would be in an uproar.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012
Yep...
That seems to be Marvin’s MO. IMO, he stayed with his previous coaches and players far too long.
His numbers being what they are, if Benson hadn’t had the fumbles over the last 4-game stretch, it maes me wonder if we’d be having this conversation?
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
as for benson being overrated
allow me to quote smokey, “you know this mannnn.”
benson being overrated is not an unknown fact to any bengals fan. its actually one of those rare moments in time concerning a player or coach, like bratt, that a very large majority of fans seem agree on.
palewook - January 6, 2012
Agree!!
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
Honestly, Football Outsiders makes a bad argument here.
I’m not defending Benson here, but the points that Football Outsiders made (poor ypc, can’t take advantage of bad run defenses) are also reflective of a poor run-blocking offensive line.
there’s nothing in Football Outsiders paragraph that separates perhaps a poor offensive line from Benson. I know both are the problem, but they seem to place the entire shortcomings on Benson himself, when YPC metrics involve more than just the runningback
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
stats can lie, they can be twisted
however, do you really think it’s just the o-line?
palewook - January 6, 2012
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
+1
Benson stinks but so does the interior of the line when it comes to run blocking
occams_tiger_teeth - January 6, 2012 via mobile
I think they are wrong too
FO mentioned he probably hurt the team in 2011 but failed to mention that he definitely will destroy our chances of doing damage in the playoffs.
The O-line ain’t the worst in the league so there is no excuse.
ExNFLScout - January 6, 2012
True,,
That is why I stand on the fact this is a team. Success, and failure of individuals and the team are the result of how they play as a unit. They all play hard, they all make mistakes, they all make stellar plays. The win, and lose together!
Law1951 - January 6, 2012
+1
truth
BeWarned - January 6, 2012
In other news...
the world economy is in the tank. That line is about as surprising as this article. Stevie Wonder could see this coming (no offense, just ironic pentameter)
david in upstate SC - January 6, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Cincy Jungle to post a comment.