What's good for Grossman should be good for Benson

[transplant]

The Bears coaching staff gave Rex Grossman many, many opportunities to prove that he was the Bears QB of the future. Given the nature Of Grossman's game, these opportunities carried with them the prospect of losing games because of Rex.

Benson seems to have a fumbling problem and he isn't very good when left in to pass protect. In combination, these two deficiencies have put him on the bench for too much of this star-crossed season. Where Grossman was left in to try to show that, in the overall, he was a positive contributor, Benson has been benched after each mistake.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a Benson fan. However, they didn't yank Grossman every time he f'ed up and this helped us find out what we had in him (not much as it turned out, but at least we know).

I'd like to see the Bears coaching staff show some patience with Benson and try to be the running team they so adamantly claim they are. They can't be that running team with Peterson or Wolf. It has to be Benson.

IMO, if Benson can't be a premier RB in this league, the Bears are toast this season. If he can be a premier RB, we still have a chance.

Let's find out.

[LordBaldric]

As a Cedric Benson fantasy owner, I second this motion!

In all honestly, he has looked more like the Benson from the old T.V. show than a quality NFL running back. It's not like there's LT sitting on the bench though, so you might as well play him and see what you have for sure.

[dougthonus]

By the thread title I was certain you were going to ask to bench him because he sucks.

[NoSkyy]

Wow. I seriously thought the exact same thing as Doug. But I agree, give Ced Ben a chance. Give him a chance to screw up and come back a game later, if he shows he can't improve, bench him. Simple as that.

[dougthonus]

As for Ced, he has 74 carries.

Our other RBs combined have 20 carries.

That's 78.7% of the carries. That's a normal percentage of carries for an undisputed #1 feature back. Tomlinson or Addai have lesser percentages for example (albeit only slightly lesser), so I disagree with your base assertion that he is getting jerked around.

Only 13 RBs in the NFL have more rushing attempts than Benson.

There is only 1 RB in the NFL with a worse YPC than Benson and over 50 carries (Rudi Johnson at 51 carries).

Basically, if anything, it seems we have been absurdly loyal to trying to run the ball with Benson despite poor results.

[Howling Mad]

Doug you keep telling us that Benson has had a fair chance at running the ball(which he has in attempts), but in reality Benson is a smash mouth football kind of back and he needs consecutive runs and some rhythm in his attempts to get going.

It seems to me the Bears are using the passing game to take advantage early, and sprinkling in some runs to mix it up. Fine. Except we keep getting told this is a running team. We are currently 21st in running attempts and 6th in passing attempts.

Thats absurd for a team that claims they are a running team!

I know we found ourselves in some deficits and were forced to pass, but there should be no way we're in the bottom half in the running attempts and top 10 in passing attempts.

The truth of the reality is our O-line sucks and we can't create an offense without blocking.

[dougthonus]

Doug you keep telling us that Benson has had a fair chance at running the ball(which he has in attempts), but in reality Benson is a smash mouth football kind of back and he needs consecutive runs and some rhythm in his attempts to get going.

There's not a less successful back in the NFL within 15 total carries of Benson. He's getting a crapload of looks relative to his success both in total and by percentage of the Bears total looks. To argue that they aren't the right type of carries seems to me like complaining you can't find the right kind of tree while standing in the forest.

It seems to me the Bears are using the passing game to take advantage early, and sprinkling in some runs to mix it up. Fine. Except we keep getting told this is a running team. We are currently 21st in running attempts and 6th in passing attempts.

It doesn't seem at all that way to me. You complained about this before in the last game. I broke down the play by play and we ran the ball much more frequently than we passed in 1st / 2nd down situations until we had to throw to catch up or were in a 2 minute drill. Our total throws vs runs is likely due to the fact that we're 1 and 3, and have to throw a lot at the end of games to catch up.

Thats absurd for a team that claims they are a running team!

Only if you ignore the context of the 4 games we've played.

I know we found ourselves in some deficits and were forced to pass, but there should be no way we're in the bottom half in the running attempts and top 10 in passing attempts.

In a game you are winning you might have 9-10 extra attempts of running to run out the clock, in a game you are losing you might have 10 extra pass attempts. I think this biases the data FAR more than you are crediting it for.

The truth of the reality is our O-line sucks and we can't create an offense without blocking.

No argument there, our offensive line has been horrible.

Name a worse RB than Benson who has gotten more carries.

[Howling Mad]

Our gameplan was ridiculous; it was in the first three games and it was last Sunday. I understand how we tried to get Grossman going early in the season to quiet the critics and relax the passing game, but that should've been stopped sooner. A team like the Chargers, or Cardinals, can split up the play calling early in the game but our team doesn't have the right personal at key positions to be able to do that. We should be running the ball like we did in 2005 to have any success.
In turn, running the game would save the defense. We have obviously seen the D be dominant only to run out of gas. This happened against San Diego and also against the Cowboys.

Forget the fact that we passed to catch up, we should be protecting the lead and controlling the ball to regulate time of possession.

If we had ran the ball early and held the ball in times of a tie or a lead, our defense wouldn't be giving up 30+ points in the fourth quarter, 2nd team backfield or not, we need to protect our biggest asset.

This team has proven it can score from special teams(FGs and TDs, something not many nfl teams can say) and occasionally on defense. Mix in some running attempts to control time of possession and you have the recipe for the 2005 Bears.

To me, this is our only option of winning.

I can't really name any running backs worse than Benson with more attempts, but the attempts aren't really the point. Its the frequency and timing of the runs. The first half should be boring football and we should be running a lot. Then if we can surprise them with a few big shots downfield we can get our game-breaker. Its not even Benson I'm promoting here, its the running game. I don't care if its Petersen, or Wolfe, just get somebody going early and let them develop some timing on hitting the gaps and getting some chemistry with the O-line.

[dougthonus]

I think you are wrong in the following ways:

1) We are trying to run first. You don't seem to think we are, but I went back and showed you a play by play which showed when we weren't in a hurry up or losing by 3 scores we ran on 1st /2nd down twice as often as we passed.

2) You seem to want us to run to dominate time of possession and rest our defense. So do I. However, you seem to be ignoring the part that we can't have one of the bottom 5 running games in the NFL and accomplish this. For this plan to work we need to be successful running the ball. Benson has gotten a crapload of chances and hasn't been successful. It may be the offensive line's fault (or at least a big portion their fault) but it's somewhat irrelevant. What's relevant is that your goal is admirable, but there has been no sign that it is achievable with our current personnel thus far.

[Howling Mad]

1) We are trying to run first. You don't seem to think we are, but I went back and showed you a play by play which showed when we weren't in a hurry up or losing by 3 scores we ran on 1st /2nd down twice as often as we passed.

The playcallling split isn't what concerns me its the playcalling judgement. I don't really care if we're running 70% of the time, but we have to make the decisions that favor our team and passing is not one of them.

We were up by 3 last Sunday and we were playing 3 wide sets. At the time we should've been playing double TEs. If we were forced to pass the ball in a 3rd and long we should've looked to hit the middle more often since one of our supposed strengths is at the TE position. What the heck was Gilmore doing in there, where was Olsen or Clark?

Our WR can't be trusted. Berrian always seems to be in the middle of a WR mistake, dropped passes, INTs, missed routes. Moose hasn't proven to be much of a weapon.

2) You seem to want us to run to dominate time of possession and rest our defense. So do I. However, you seem to be ignoring the part that we can't have one of the bottom 5 running games in the NFL and accomplish this. For this plan to work we need to be successful running the ball. Benson has gotten a crapload of chances and hasn't been successful. It may be the offensive line's fault (or at least a big portion their fault) but it's somewhat irrelevant. What's relevant is that your goal is admirable, but there has been no sign that it is achievable with our current personnel thus far.

Benson hasn't completely failed yet, he has had 3 games where hes the featured back. When you asked me to name a RB worse than Benson with more attempts I realized there are better RBs with more attempts doing just as bad if not worse. Which pretty much means nothing as far as success is concerned. These guys are yet to get their games going. Not saying Benson will bust out to be a star, but giving him the same number chances doens't hurt unless the fumbles continue.

If that happens switch to Petersen or Wolfe. We could use AP's toughness and Wolfe's speed could be used to get to the sidelines. Our WR and TE are above average blockers for their positions and could be used to attack the sidelines with some speed in the running game. Our short passing game could also benefit from the speed in Wolfe and the blocking at the WR and TE positions.

Even if all that doesn't work and we face a 3rd and 3(much like we did in the 4th quarter, 12:37, CHI-13/DET-10. We should run the ball with someone who won't fumble it, Benson, Wolfe, AP, I don't care.

Punting in that situation isn't so bad. We were a little bit past mid field and punting or taking a FG(don't know think we were close enough) would of been my choice. Our defense is tough enough to last in a 80+ yard defense drive, but taking chances with a pass was an idiotic move.

[dougthonus]

The playcallling split isn't what concerns me its the playcalling judgement. I don't really care if we're running 70% of the time, but we have to make the decisions that favor our team and passing is not one of them.

Is running the ball favoring our team? We have probably a bottom 5 production per attempt out of our running game and no big play potential.

When you asked me to name a RB worse than Benson with more attempts I realized there are better RBs with more attempts doing just as bad if not worse.

No there isn't. There is no RB with more attempts doing worse than Benson. There is no RB within 15 attempts of him doing worse than him.

These guys are yet to get their games going. Not saying Benson will bust out to be a star, but giving him the same number chances doens't hurt unless the fumbles continue.

He's currently had the 14th most chances in the NFL and no one ahead of him has been nearly as bad in a yards per carry basis. He also has more fumbles than anyone ahead of him on the list (and is tied for 2nd in the NFL with Steven Jackson, only behind DeShaun Foster).

I don't blame Benson entirely, I think the offensive line has been awful. However, I don't blame the playcalling which has given Benson a very large number of runs based on his productivity.

[Howling Mad]

Is running the ball favoring our team? We have probably a bottom 5 production per attempt out of our running game and no big play potential.

Yes it would. Limiting turnovers and not giving away points from those turnovers is what we should try to prevent.

We have a total of 14 turnovers, of which, 9 were interceptions. 2 of those Cedric accounts for by fumbles. Running the ball lets the clock tick and prevents turnovers which have mainly come from the QB position and specifically in the passing game.

No there isn't. There is no RB with more attempts doing worse than Benson. There is no RB within 15 attempts of him doing worse than him.

I'm going to ask you to look a little bit past the number on this one.

Maybe guys aren't doing worse in a striaght up numbers comparison but note who these guys are.

In the rushing attempts leaderboard, listed 9th on the list, LaDainian Tomlinson(the best football player on the planet) has 77 att. with 262 yrd and a 3.4 avg. Larry Johnson listed at 11, has 75 att with 263 yrd and 3.5 avg.

Now for fun...

Thomas Jones listed 12, has 75 att with 254 yrd and 3.5 avg

(also look at Stephen Jackson, Frank Gore, Rudi Johnson, all top tier RBs putting up similar numbers.)

Now considering our O-line, and that this is Cedric's 1st year as the featured back his stats of:

74 att 239 yrd and 3.2 avg ...dont' look so bad.

Now if you wanna argue about his fumbles, then you'll have to look at all the RB with 2 fumbles. Bush, Gore, Jackson, Alexander, and the list goes on.

Not surprising a first year featured back is leading in carried fumbles in the first four games. Not fair to throw him under the bus for this just yet.

My conclusion, 4 games out of 17 is a small sample size. Even your superstar backs are putting up terrible numbers in context of their status.

I know our offense is bad but we have to utilize the strongest points, even if they are the weakest in the league. Guess it shows you how bad our offense really is.

No matter what, passing has proven to provide turnovers, which is mainly due to the O-line. Once again, we should let the special teams do the scoring along with the occasional defensive score and then protect the ball and possession with running the ball. As long as we keep field position in mind we should be able to dominate our offense with runs and squeeze a few field goals in.

If its a tie or we are leading, even by just one point, I want us to run. Our defense is great enough to be able to handle a small lead and occasionally score for a gamebreaker. Lovie has chosen to strike repeatedly at times whem we should be worried about protecting the lead and our defense.

[dougthonus]

The problem with your assertion here is you are taking everyone who has disappointed in any way and comparing them to Benson who is worse than everyone on the list in every category you mentioned.

Sure, there are good backs who've fumbled twice. Benson has fumbled 3 times.

Sure, there are good backs who've disappointed in ypc, but Benson's is even worse.

You seem to also be shifting the argument. My point is not that we should give up on Benson. My point is that Benson has gotten more than a fair shot to do something thusfar. His 74 carries in 4 games is a high amount of carries relative to his success and the team's success. There are maybe 3 RBs in the NFL with significantly (more than 10 additional carries) than Benson.

Considering the Bears situation (losing frequently) I don't feel like Benson has gotten an unfair amount of chances.

[Howling Mad]

Considering the guys who have disappointed, and there are several of them, are pretty high profile backs, and Benson is a first year feature back, with a crappy O-line; his production hasn't been that disappointing.

As stated before, its not the number of chances but the timing of those chances. The playcalling hasn't facored to the running games' strengths.

I'm not sure how I can explain this, but its just the feel of the game at the time its happening. > There seems to be no rhythm in the running game. Maybe its because the o-line has been so bad we can't rely on their run blocking, but Benson's attempts, abundant or not, have seemed to be scattered and not given him opportunities to gain chemistry with the 0-line.

Even if Bensons chance is up, which is ludicrous at 4 games, then we should try another back and see what production we can get from them.

No matter what we should stay committed to the run because our passing game has not produced and caused turnovers that turn into points.

[dougthonus]

Let me clarify and then give up:

1) My point is that comparing Benson to other underachievers who we believe to be great players doesn't make him great. There are a lot more crappy players who are performing at a similar level than great ones.

2) I agree with your point that we need to run the ball. I just disagree with your view that we aren't trying. I think we are trying, but are unsuccessful in doing it well. Our splits are influenced by the 2 minute offense and being behind in so many games.

3) I don't blame Benson exclusively for his lack of production. The offensive line has been terrible, however, he has gotten quite a few chances based on his performance. So I don't think Benson is getting 'screwed' in any way opportunity wise or anything.

I do agree largely with your assertion that we need to try to run the ball, avoid turnovers, and control the clock. Our running game has not been successful enough to accomplish those goals, and I don't think it's because we haven't tried. I just think it's because our offensive line hasn't been good enough combined with Benson not being elusive enough.

[Howling Mad]

Ok me too, I will agree to disgree.

We have the same conceptual believes, but details are a little murky. You believe Benson has had a fair chance and has had enough attempts to allow him success. I agree, but realize this is a long season and 4 games is a small sample size. Also taking note that several elite backs are also not producing in the same amount of games.

So to the OP's topic, Benson should receive the same chances as Grossman, which has been about a year and half worth of games. We can't play him for 4 games as the featured back and be down on him so soon.

The "screwed" part I keep talking about reflects the focus of the offense which has been, in my perspective, passing. You disagree and believe we've split it even. (Not counting 2 minute drills and large deficits) My response is this team can not split the playcalling, we must run the ball and mix in a pass here and there, but the run game must be the focus. Kinda like 05.



I think the conclusion we have both come to realize is that our O-line can not block. Only makes sense our passing and running game hasn't produced. Everything starts from the middle. Any team with a great O-line, will always have a legit chance at the playoffs. This is why a team like the Broncos have had 4 different leading rushers(of which were no namers), and why Clinton Portis looked like Walter Payton in Denver and less than stellar in Wash.

The mistakes our QBs have made have hardly resulted from the deficiencies in our O-line, but the running game can't be blamed for not blocking.

[dougthonus]

I think we probably agree more than disagree, but are arguing fiercely at the details.

I think we need to try to ride Benson as much as we can. If the offensive line doesn't get better we're done for anyway. It's not like the passing game is performing at a high level. My point to this wasn't that we need to go away from Benson, but that I think we've been trying to ride him as much as the situation has allowed thus far. I would continue to try to get him 20+ carries a game, but when you are losing by multiple scores and playing from behind it gets tough to do that.

[Howling Mad]

...running backs can't be blamed for blocking.

(to correct my last post)


Now Doug, I can agree witht hat. Benson is our key to any success and we need to stay committed to him.

Lets wait and see for the next game, if the playcalling annoys me again, we can re-start our argument.

[Cliff Levingston]

I think we need to try to ride Benson as much as we can. If the offensive line doesn't get better we're done for anyway. It's not like the passing game is performing at a high level. My point to this wasn't that we need to go away from Benson, but that I think we've been trying to ride him as much as the situation has allowed thus far. I would continue to try to get him 20+ carries a game, but when you are losing by multiple scores and playing from behind it gets tough to do that.

This is it. Our offense is based completely around being able to run the ball effectively. So far we haven't been able to do that regularly so Turner's looked more toward the passing game and completely abandoned the play action, or something like that.

It all starts up front. Our offensive line needs to step up their games. The only solace we can take in all this is that it took about 4 games to really get the run game going last year as well. Hopefully they'll come out looking to maul the Packers D line this weekend.

[chitownsports4ever]

Part of the problem is actually on Benson .Since he is lacking in pass protection skillz you have to change backs when you want to pass and so now opposing defenses know when he is in the game that 90+% of the time it will be a running play to him .

Playaction only works if youre actually a threat to pass and the bears are not as they dont want to leave the QB exposed by Bensons inadequate pass protection.