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

UPDATE: Cedric Benson signs with Green Bay
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
I Am Rodgers


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 7249
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:

MeThinks Benson is a much better runner than he is getting credit for. Might turn a few heads in this inside zone with no extras in the box.


Do you think the extra man in the box could be a big issue for him? Looking through the team's he's been on he's had a rookie in Andy Dalton, hurt and ineffective Carson Palmer, and not good Ryan Fitzpatrick. Maybe he could be a 4.2YPA guy without an extra guy in the box?
_________________


stallyns wrote:
Good thing for talky-talk Harbaugh he has an outstanding citizen/player like Aldon Smith on his team and not a classless hooligan like Clay Matthews.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13910
PostPosted: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I for one would not be shocks one bit if Benson's yards per went up a good bit. Not a great deal though because odds are good he pulls more than his share of shorts also.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8836
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mission wrote:
Packers need a guy who can convert in short yardage. How many times were they in shotgun on 3rd and 1? Benson is that guy. With Green presumably in a traditional 3rd down role, what else do we need?


You stole my thunder here. It would be great if he is that guy. Plus he could make play-action a lot more fun too. Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phillipraz


Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 2791
Location: Phoenix, AZ
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
mission wrote:
Packers need a guy who can convert in short yardage. How many times were they in shotgun on 3rd and 1? Benson is that guy. With Green presumably in a traditional 3rd down role, what else do we need?


You stole my thunder here. It would be great if he is that guy. Plus he could make play-action a lot more fun too. Smile


agree with you both. we arent looking for a guy to break 50, 60 yd runs. just to take some pressure off rodg on those 3rd and shorts.
_________________
Twitter: fill3up
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blueswedeshoes


Joined: 08 Jun 2011
Posts: 1547
Location: WisKAHNsin
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
I for one would not be shocks one bit if Benson's yards per went up a good bit. Not a great deal though because odds are good he pulls more than his share of shorts also.


In the lockerroom? We haven't had those kinds of shenanigans since Brett left town. Razz

I think this will be an interesting test of the foundation of our run game. If a healthy Cedric Benson can't get yards against defenses that have to be uber-aware of the Packers' passing game than the problem with our running game may have little to do with the running backs.
_________________
Ron wrote:
Baxter...is that you? Bark twice if you're in Milwaukee.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fired-Up


Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 788
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blueswedeshoes wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
I for one would not be shocks one bit if Benson's yards per went up a good bit. Not a great deal though because odds are good he pulls more than his share of shorts also.


In the lockerroom? We haven't had those kinds of shenanigans since Brett left town. Razz

I think this will be an interesting test of the foundation of our run game. If a healthy Cedric Benson can't get yards against defenses that have to be uber-aware of the Packers' passing game than the problem with our running game may have little to do with the running backs.


I disagree. Running backs and O-lines work in tandems. You need both to succeed. Benson ran behind a pretty darn good O-line in Cleveland. The O-line can only get him to the 2nd level. Their work is largely done after that. Is it the lines fault that Benson can't work any magic in the open field? No. Converesly, if a running back with obvious talent is thrown onto a team with a horrible line it's hard to produce. See Chris Johnson last season, that interior O-line was a disaster. I've seen Adrian Peterson do it after the Vikings O-line went into suck mode, but that isn't normal.

I don't think the O-line has been the issue with our run game. Sitton, Lang and Bulaga can move some guys. How many times have we seen a back go 5 yards untouched and then just get tackled. They usually can't beat another man.
_________________
The Packers are the premier franchise in the NFL. DEAL WITH IT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Willink


Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 11610
Location: Rochester, NY
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fired-Up wrote:
Benson ran behind a pretty darn good O-line in Cincinnati.


This isn't true.

According to FO, the Bengals run blocking has ranked:

2011: 20th
2010: 18th
2009: 24th (which was Bensons' career year)
_________________

Quote:
If I have not lost my mind I can sometimes hear it preparing to defect
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10637
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fired-Up wrote:

I don't think the O-line has been the issue with our run game. Sitton, Lang and Bulaga can move some guys. How many times have we seen a back go 5 yards untouched and then just get tackled. They usually can't beat another man.


It kinda is an issue with the OL.

Scheme.

Inherently the way that blocking scheme works, it struggles in short yardage situations. It has more in common with pass protection than a "power" blocking scheme. It's not just "can these guys win a 1 on 1 battle". It's not going to be a night and day difference no matter how much Benson has left in the tank. It's a move for experience, stability and durability, and isn't going to be a night and day difference either way.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
HokieHigh


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 1879
Location: Blacksburg
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I respect your opinion that Cedric is going to be a bad addition, but you're wrong and I hate you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Fired-Up


Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 788
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Willink wrote:
Fired-Up wrote:
Benson ran behind a pretty darn good O-line in Cincinnati.


This isn't true.

According to FO, the Bengals run blocking has ranked:

2011: 20th
2010: 18th
2009: 24th (which was Bensons' career year)


You can't statistically evaluate an OL.
_________________
The Packers are the premier franchise in the NFL. DEAL WITH IT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
incognito_man


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 32008
Location: Madison
PostPosted: Thu Aug 16, 2012 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fired-Up wrote:
Willink wrote:
Fired-Up wrote:
Benson ran behind a pretty darn good O-line in Cincinnati.


This isn't true.

According to FO, the Bengals run blocking has ranked:

2011: 20th
2010: 18th
2009: 24th (which was Bensons' career year)


You can't statistically evaluate an OL.


yes you can
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Packman Luke


Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 20000
Location: Minnesota =(
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

incognito_man wrote:
Fired-Up wrote:
Willink wrote:
Fired-Up wrote:
Benson ran behind a pretty darn good O-line in Cincinnati.


This isn't true.

According to FO, the Bengals run blocking has ranked:

2011: 20th
2010: 18th
2009: 24th (which was Bensons' career year)


You can't statistically evaluate an OL.


yes you can


Checkmate!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13910
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't know if I would call checkmate there. I tend to agree with him. Two very good line guys can view the same play from a much different POV pending many things.

A guy like Wells always graded very high for me but a smart line guy like msmre was not a big fan. Many on here feel Sitton is the best guard in the game. I disagree and view him a click below the elite.

Just too many moving parts with line play to grade it black and white on paper.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HokieHigh


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 1879
Location: Blacksburg
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
Don't know if I would call checkmate there. I tend to agree with him. Two very good line guys can view the same play from a much different POV pending many things.

A guy like Wells always graded very high for me but a smart line guy like msmre was not a big fan. Many on here feel Sitton is the best guard in the game. I disagree and view him a click below the elite.

Just too many moving parts with line play to grade it black and white on paper.


Especially in the zbs and especially because we are on the outside of the playbook looking in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
incognito_man


Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 32008
Location: Madison
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

this is how they're evaluated:

Quote:
RB Yards: Yards per carry by that team's running backs, according to standard NFL numbers.

Power Success: Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer. This is the only statistic on this page that includes quarterbacks.

Stuffed: Percentage of runs where the running back is tackled at or behind the line of scrimmage. Since being stuffed is bad, teams are ranked from stuffed least often (#1) to most often (#32).

Second Level Yards: Yards which this team's running backs earn between 5-10 yards past the line of scrimmage, divided by total running back carries.

Open Field Yards: Yards which this team's running backs earn more than 10 yards past the line of scrimmage, divided by total running back carries.


So they certainly can be evaluated statistically.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 11 of 12

 
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