Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Cedric Benson signs with Packers
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bears2308


Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 2431
Location: Indianapolis
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bearsaddict


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 3544
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 12:33 am    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing
_________________
Here's to hoping Emery is NOTHING like Angelo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:41 am    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
I did not watch either of them much last year. Benson has been declining over the three yr stretch but still performs better than most backs. I don't want him but he is not useless and will help the Pack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:43 am    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bearsaddict wrote:
bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing
There was no nonsense in the simple, TRUE, statement that Benson had a better rushing average than Bush. Thousand yard a year backs are always of use and there is no nonsense there either.

The fact is he will help the Pack like him or not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TexasBearsFan


Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 1204
Location: Waco, TX
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:35 am    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bearsaddict wrote:
bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing


Like banging your head on the wall, ain't it? From now on, my response in any thread, to any post, on any subject is gonna be "Well, but he had 1000 yards!! I didn't watch him play or see how he looked doing it, but HE STILL HAD 1000 YARDS."

Apparently, that's effective.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 2:46 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

TexasBearsFan wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing


Like banging your head on the wall, ain't it? From now on, my response in any thread, to any post, on any subject is gonna be "Well, but he had 1000 yards!! I didn't watch him play or see how he looked doing it, but HE STILL HAD 1000 YARDS."

Apparently, that's effective.
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bears2308


Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 2431
Location: Indianapolis
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

ChicagoAl wrote:
TexasBearsFan wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing


Like banging your head on the wall, ain't it? From now on, my response in any thread, to any post, on any subject is gonna be "Well, but he had 1000 yards!! I didn't watch him play or see how he looked doing it, but HE STILL HAD 1000 YARDS."

Apparently, that's effective.
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?


He had an ugly 1,000 yards. Cincy coaches saw the most of him and didn't bother to keep him. He signed with Green Bay for the vet minimum months after free agency began. That tells me enough right there that he isn't a very good running-back. It more so shows how awful the RB situation in GB has become.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AZBearsFan


Moderator
Joined: 04 Feb 2006
Posts: 10653
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 7:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
_________________

GRRLacher wrote:
I told you guys AZ was awesome...he in fact makes triple the pay I get for moderating here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bearsaddict


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 3544
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
The highlighted is part of what Al seems to not understand somehow. The key to gb is the passing game. They don't run often, and Benson is going to be unused for the majority of every game. Furthermore, if he carries for 15 times a game, he will be a far cry from a 1000 yd. back, which seems to be Al's measuring stick, no matter how many 2 yd. carries it took to get there.
_________________
Here's to hoping Emery is NOTHING like Angelo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:37 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
TexasBearsFan wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
bears2308 wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
bearsaddict wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
JPeppers90 wrote:
This is worrisome.

Why? The guy has averaged less than 4 ypc in 4 of the last 5 seasons and is a non factor in the passing game. I'd be more worried if they re-signed Ryan Grant. Benson is the definition of "just a guy".
Benson has rushed for over a thousand yards each of the last three years. That is not common.

Benson gets his yards because of volume, not because he is a good rusher. On a per carry basis he is actually below the league average the past 3 years. An average rusher (4.0 ypc) is gonna give you 1200 yards if he gets 300 carries. In 2010 for example, Benson's 3.5 ypc was almost worst in the league, but because he got 321 carries he still had 1111 rush yards. That's a BAD running back right there.
Not really, like DePeche Mode says "everything counts in large amounts". Thousand yd rushers are valuable for many reasons not the least of which is they can be used to eat up time to secure a win. There were only fifteen last year, not quite one per two teams.
No Al, AZ is exactly right. If you gave James Allen the ball 600 times a year, he would get 1000 yards. When it is all about the volume of carries, then it doesn't really matter.
Benson had a little over 250 carries last year. That is only 16 a game. A four yard average gets you first downs with three carries.

Benson had a better average than Michael Bush last year and we, for the most part, were thrilled to have signed him. Same number of carries.

It is important to have a back who can pound the DL when desirable. That is why we signed Bush. Benson can do that, too.


Did you watch Benson AND Bush play last year? Bush is clearly the better player. If put in Benson's role the past two years in Cincy I have no doubt Bush puts up better numbers. Benson has had a respectable passing game his entire career in Cincy and was maybe an above-average back his first year there. He's no bueno nowadays.
THANK YOU!!! Debunking nonsense just where's me out sometimes. Laughing


Like banging your head on the wall, ain't it? From now on, my response in any thread, to any post, on any subject is gonna be "Well, but he had 1000 yards!! I didn't watch him play or see how he looked doing it, but HE STILL HAD 1000 YARDS."

Apparently, that's effective.
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?


He had an ugly 1,000 yards. Cincy coaches saw the most of him and didn't bother to keep him. He signed with Green Bay for the vet minimum months after free agency began. That tells me enough right there that he isn't a very good running-back. It more so shows how awful the RB situation in GB has become.
He will help GB and is a serviceable back. It is interesting to note that he was 12th, 13th, an 8th in rushing yardage the last three years. Not very many backs had 1000 each of the last three years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

bearsaddict wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
The highlighted is part of what Al seems to not understand somehow. The key to gb is the passing game. They don't run often, and Benson is going to be unused for the majority of every game. Furthermore, if he carries for 15 times a game, he will be a far cry from a 1000 yd. back, which seems to be Al's measuring stick, no matter how many 2 yd. carries it took to get there.
He averaged 16 per game last yr. GB will be very happy if he is close to 1000 for the yr.

I know people here love to wish him ill.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
There is no doubt that durability is a key in gaining 1000. This is something most backs don't really have. GB will use him to help secure games and will keep Rodgers from being unnecessarily exposed. He is capable of playing this role and is still big and strong.

Before disparaging Benson too much it is worthy of note that his average gain is almost the same as the Bears rushing attack but for last yr and the Bears had one season with a 1000 yd back in the last three.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TexasBearsFan


Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 1204
Location: Waco, TX
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:08 am    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
There is no doubt that durability is a key in gaining 1000. This is something most backs don't really have. GB will use him to help secure games and will keep Rodgers from being unnecessarily exposed. He is capable of playing this role and is still big and strong.

Before disparaging Benson too much it is worthy of note that his average gain is almost the same as the Bears rushing attack but for last yr and the Bears had one season with a 1000 yd back in the last three.


So the fact that the Bears, prior to last year, have been unable to run the ball effectively behind one of the worst offensive lines ever put together is now proof that Benson is a good back? There seems to be no end to your attempts to spin his mediocre numbers into something good.

Let me spell this out, because you seem to be missing it. His average per carry is bad. It's been bad his whole career. That's the important number. If you looked up the term "just a guy" it'd have a picture of Benson's face.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChicagoAl


Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Posts: 7846
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

TexasBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
There is no doubt that durability is a key in gaining 1000. This is something most backs don't really have. GB will use him to help secure games and will keep Rodgers from being unnecessarily exposed. He is capable of playing this role and is still big and strong.

Before disparaging Benson too much it is worthy of note that his average gain is almost the same as the Bears rushing attack but for last yr and the Bears had one season with a 1000 yd back in the last three.


So the fact that the Bears, prior to last year, have been unable to run the ball effectively behind one of the worst offensive lines ever put together is now proof that Benson is a good back? There seems to be no end to your attempts to spin his mediocre numbers into something good.

Let me spell this out, because you seem to be missing it. His average per carry is bad. It's been bad his whole career. That's the important number. If you looked up the term "just a guy" it'd have a picture of Benson's face.
Sorry but "just a guy" does not have repeated 1000 yd seasons. Benson has hurt his career by his off field antics not his play. If he is bad our rushing attack was just as bad. You want backs who can move the ball and who is durable. Benson's numbers show that he has done this and cannot be denied. Now not wanting to put up with him is another story.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GOGRIESE


Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 17983
Location: Austin Texas
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 4:17 pm    Post subject: Re: Cedric Benson signs with Packers Reply with quote

ChicagoAl wrote:
TexasBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
AZBearsFan wrote:
ChicagoAl wrote:
So it is an illusion that he had 1000? Or MY delusion? Or is it a fact?

The total is just a simple matter of arithmetic. If you get 300 carries you're gonna get 1000 yards unless you're 2010 Chester Taylor. Benson's average per carry is below average for a starter though and has been for most of his career. I'd say he's best suited for a short yardage role like Bush but he was never a great short yardage back, at least not when he was here. I sincerely do hope that GB uses him like a bell cow back though - it would take the ball out of Rodgers' hands more.
There is no doubt that durability is a key in gaining 1000. This is something most backs don't really have. GB will use him to help secure games and will keep Rodgers from being unnecessarily exposed. He is capable of playing this role and is still big and strong.

Before disparaging Benson too much it is worthy of note that his average gain is almost the same as the Bears rushing attack but for last yr and the Bears had one season with a 1000 yd back in the last three.


So the fact that the Bears, prior to last year, have been unable to run the ball effectively behind one of the worst offensive lines ever put together is now proof that Benson is a good back? There seems to be no end to your attempts to spin his mediocre numbers into something good.

Let me spell this out, because you seem to be missing it. His average per carry is bad. It's been bad his whole career. That's the important number. If you looked up the term "just a guy" it'd have a picture of Benson's face.
Sorry but "just a guy" does not have repeated 1000 yd seasons. Benson has hurt his career by his off field antics not his play. If he is bad our rushing attack was just as bad. You want backs who can move the ball and who is durable. Benson's numbers show that he has done this and cannot be denied. Now not wanting to put up with him is another story.


In today's NFL. That could very easily happen.
_________________

^^ props to Ty on the sig Smile

2013-Adopt A Bear- CB Tim Jennings #26
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Chicago Bears All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group