PDA

View Full Version : Domanick Davis or Michael Bennett


JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 09:03 PM
Porky in I are in an pretty interesting conversation, to say the least, on who is a better RB when healthy....love to get the boards opinion.

*accidently typed David....supposed to be Davis....my bad.

Texas
05-11-2006, 09:05 PM
DD. He doesnt get injured as much. He has proved himself to me. The FO thought DD was good enough to pass on Reggie Bush. I doubt that would have done that for Michael Bennet

Hulk75
05-11-2006, 09:07 PM
Sorry ment to vote for Domanick, MY BAD!!!!!

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 09:08 PM
Sorry ment to vote for Domanick, MY BAD!!!!!

lol...damn you i figured there wouldn't be one vote for bennett other than porky's and now look what you've done....lol

thunderkyss
05-11-2006, 09:44 PM
Is there anyway you can fix the name??

I mean those two guys might have voted for Bennette, because they don't consider Carr a running back??

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 09:44 PM
I think they are both good backs, and I'd like to see what Bennett could do if he is 100%.

Porky
05-11-2006, 09:45 PM
Okay, let's make this fair. I said when completely healthy Bennett is the better back. That should be the criteria. Obviousely, health has been an issue. Secondly, it's not exactly objective asking a bunch of Texans homers. That's like asking showing a man a picture of his wife and Eva Longeria, and expecting him to say Eva is prettier when the wife is standing there. Half these people have probably never seen Bennett play. Not objective! :hides:

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 09:47 PM
Hey i said specifically i wanted to see what this board thought....not the whole NFL network....i have a lot of time but not that much. but your right....you did say when both healthy....anyone who wants to change their vote now....well....just post it down here or something i don't know.

unfortunately i can't change the name...i know i'm an idiot...lol

although it would be interesting to set up a poll that a bunch of objective fans could vote for....i guess we'll have our real answer on opening day....but i also think that most of the people on this board are pretty objective....not to mention 99% were saying two weeks ago that they basically wanted a new RB in reggie....so i don't think there is too much homerism going on around here to say the least.

Scooter
05-11-2006, 09:48 PM
DD. if he stays healthy, his production as a starter equals more than 2000 yards total offense. bennett's a homerun guy, but has done so with an established line and getting his yards in junktime & passing downs. if you can argue for dd's production, james allan average 3.3 yards per carry & stacey mack averaged 2.7ypc ... while DD averaged 4.3 as a rookie behind the exact same line & coach. he's also held up for 230+ carries every season (and 300+ once), while bennett has only crossed 200 once. also, despite being a "homerun" guy, bennett's even weaker in the touchdown department (12 in 5 years, dd has 23 in 3) and is not as strong as a pass catching option.

Porky
05-11-2006, 09:51 PM
From the Pro Football Weekly archives in 2001 (http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives/draft_2000/scoutingreports_rb.asp)

Drafted in the 1st round -

RB Michael Bennett
(5-9, 207, 4.4) Wisconsin
Notes: Top high school and collegiate sprinter. Won four Big Ten sprint titles last year and qualified for the Olympic trials but did not go in order to concentrate on football. Ran a 10.22 in the 100-meter dash and a 22.76 in the 200 meters at the Big Ten outdoor meet and was named the Conference Indoor Male Track Athlete of the Year. Nephew of former Packers first-round pick Tony Bennett (University of Mississippi, Packers and Colts). Was a Prop casualty in 1998. Backed up Ron Dayne in 99 and carried 57 times for 298 yards and four touchdowns and had one catch for 39 yards. Replaced Dayne in 2000 and carried 294-1,598-10 and had four catches for 23 yards despite missing two full games and parts of a few others. Had to sit out one game because of the sneaker store case, in which Wisconsin athletes received unadvertised discounts on shoes and clothing, and another due to injury. Then, on February 12, 2001, at 3:45 a.m., Bennett was arrested by the Madison, Wisc., police following an early morning dispute. Bennett allegedly kicked in the apartment door of a 19-year-old female who lived in the same apartment complex. Bennett pleaded innocent March 5. He faces charges of criminal damage to property and unlawful use of a telephone.

Positives: One of the two or three fastest football players in America over longer distances and does not lose much speed when he puts his pads on. Is not a sprinter playing football, but a legitimate and tough player with good football character. Improved by leaps and bounds in 2000 and still has a lot of upside potential. Is just learning to run with patience and how to make his cuts without slowing down. Looks small, but he is powerful for his size and runs hard. Is always a threat to go all the way and can run inside or outside. Handled questions about his incident openly and with poise at the Combine. Also seemed to catch the ball pretty well in drills.

Negatives: Is not very big. Has only really done it for one year. Still learning his trade and needs a lot of reps. Does not always show good vision or running instincts and judgment. Gets too impatient at times and does not wait for his blocking or waits too long. Needs to develop a better feel for the flow of the defense. Has very little experience catching the ball. Needs a lot of work on his blocking, especially how he picks up the blitz. Had way too many pass rushers just go right through or around him. Has some off-the-field baggage.

Summary: No underclassman running back who came out could have used an extra year in school to learn and develop more than this player. However, he has such rare speed and potential, he still figures to be a very high draft pick.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 09:55 PM
From the Pro Football Weekly archives in 2001 (http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives/draft_2000/scoutingreports_rb.asp)

Drafted in the 1st round -

RB Michael Bennett
(5-9, 207, 4.4) Wisconsin
Notes: Top high school and collegiate sprinter. Won four Big Ten sprint titles last year and qualified for the Olympic trials but did not go in order to concentrate on football. Ran a 10.22 in the 100-meter dash and a 22.76 in the 200 meters at the Big Ten outdoor meet and was named the Conference Indoor Male Track Athlete of the Year. Nephew of former Packers first-round pick Tony Bennett (University of Mississippi, Packers and Colts). Was a Prop casualty in 1998. Backed up Ron Dayne in 99 and carried 57 times for 298 yards and four touchdowns and had one catch for 39 yards. Replaced Dayne in 2000 and carried 294-1,598-10 and had four catches for 23 yards despite missing two full games and parts of a few others. Had to sit out one game because of the sneaker store case, in which Wisconsin athletes received unadvertised discounts on shoes and clothing, and another due to injury. Then, on February 12, 2001, at 3:45 a.m., Bennett was arrested by the Madison, Wisc., police following an early morning dispute. Bennett allegedly kicked in the apartment door of a 19-year-old female who lived in the same apartment complex. Bennett pleaded innocent March 5. He faces charges of criminal damage to property and unlawful use of a telephone.

Positives: One of the two or three fastest football players in America over longer distances and does not lose much speed when he puts his pads on. Is not a sprinter playing football, but a legitimate and tough player with good football character. Improved by leaps and bounds in 2000 and still has a lot of upside potential. Is just learning to run with patience and how to make his cuts without slowing down. Looks small, but he is powerful for his size and runs hard. Is always a threat to go all the way and can run inside or outside. Handled questions about his incident openly and with poise at the Combine. Also seemed to catch the ball pretty well in drills.

Negatives: Is not very big. Has only really done it for one year. Still learning his trade and needs a lot of reps. Does not always show good vision or running instincts and judgment. Gets too impatient at times and does not wait for his blocking or waits too long. Needs to develop a better feel for the flow of the defense. Has very little experience catching the ball. Needs a lot of work on his blocking, especially how he picks up the blitz. Had way too many pass rushers just go right through or around him. Has some off-the-field baggage.

Summary: No underclassman running back who came out could have used an extra year in school to learn and develop more than this player. However, he has such rare speed and potential, he still figures to be a very high draft pick.

hey i'm right there with you....the guy is a great athlete....especially out of college....but as far as RB skills and what i believe makes a succesful RB....well...he hasn't shown my one thing that says he is dependable...much less better than DD. home run threats are great and all....but there is a reason the NFL wasn't jumping all over him when he hit the market. come on....2 years 3 million....are you honestly going to tell me that NFL teams would be giving Davis less than that if he was a FA??

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 09:58 PM
From the Pro Football Weekly archives in 2001 (http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives/draft_2000/scoutingreports_rb.asp)

Drafted in the 1st round -

RB Michael Bennett
(5-9, 207, 4.4) Wisconsin
Notes: Top high school and collegiate sprinter. Won four Big Ten sprint titles last year and qualified for the Olympic trials but did not go in order to concentrate on football. Ran a 10.22 in the 100-meter dash and a 22.76 in the 200 meters at the Big Ten outdoor meet and was named the Conference Indoor Male Track Athlete of the Year. Nephew of former Packers first-round pick Tony Bennett (University of Mississippi, Packers and Colts). Was a Prop casualty in 1998. Backed up Ron Dayne in 99 and carried 57 times for 298 yards and four touchdowns and had one catch for 39 yards. Replaced Dayne in 2000 and carried 294-1,598-10 and had four catches for 23 yards despite missing two full games and parts of a few others. Had to sit out one game because of the sneaker store case, in which Wisconsin athletes received unadvertised discounts on shoes and clothing, and another due to injury. Then, on February 12, 2001, at 3:45 a.m., Bennett was arrested by the Madison, Wisc., police following an early morning dispute. Bennett allegedly kicked in the apartment door of a 19-year-old female who lived in the same apartment complex. Bennett pleaded innocent March 5. He faces charges of criminal damage to property and unlawful use of a telephone.

Positives: One of the two or three fastest football players in America over longer distances and does not lose much speed when he puts his pads on. Is not a sprinter playing football, but a legitimate and tough player with good football character. Improved by leaps and bounds in 2000 and still has a lot of upside potential. Is just learning to run with patience and how to make his cuts without slowing down. Looks small, but he is powerful for his size and runs hard. Is always a threat to go all the way and can run inside or outside. Handled questions about his incident openly and with poise at the Combine. Also seemed to catch the ball pretty well in drills.

Negatives: Is not very big. Has only really done it for one year. Still learning his trade and needs a lot of reps. Does not always show good vision or running instincts and judgment. Gets too impatient at times and does not wait for his blocking or waits too long. Needs to develop a better feel for the flow of the defense. Has very little experience catching the ball. Needs a lot of work on his blocking, especially how he picks up the blitz. Had way too many pass rushers just go right through or around him. Has some off-the-field baggage.

Summary: No underclassman running back who came out could have used an extra year in school to learn and develop more than this player. However, he has such rare speed and potential, he still figures to be a very high draft pick.

Cool, he went to college up by me :)
#3 RB coming out of the draft. And when you look at the RBs in that draft there's a bunch of good players in there. Thanks for the good site.

Also, I have to agree with you. When healthy, Bennett is the better back but if he comes here I see him giving DD a rest, not DD giving him a rest.

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 09:59 PM
come on....2 years 3 million....are you honestly going to tell me that NFL teams would be giving Davis less than that if he was a FA??

He was offered that because of his problems of staying healthy, not because he doesn't have any talent.

vtech9
05-11-2006, 10:02 PM
Okay, let's make this fair. I said when completely healthy Bennett is the better back. That should be the criteria. Obviousely, health has been an issue. Secondly, it's not exactly objective asking a bunch of Texans homers. That's like asking showing a man a picture of his wife and Eva Longeria, and expecting him to say Eva is prettier when the wife is standing there. Half these people have probably never seen Bennett play. Not objective! :hides:
Well, I have seen Bennett play, although he has been on :crutch: more often.

At the sports bar that I go to, to watch Texans games, there are about 15 to 20 Vikings fans that watch them play on the next TV. They all liked Bennett, but almost to a man, they had mentioned to me that they would love to have DD instead.

Personally, I like Bennett, but I do like DD better. DD just seems to break more tackles and get those extra yards.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:04 PM
who said he doesn't have talent?! i know he has talent....but if the guy was a better RB than DD and everyone in the league thought so....i guarantee he would have found a better offer than 2 years 3 million....its common sense....someone so great would find a biter....for instance....Al Davis would have been all over him....potential and low money....but he got paid exactly what the NFL thinks he is now....a backup RB. but anyways....if the deal gets done....we will see who starts on opening day.

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 10:05 PM
Thats quite good Porkster but the fact of the matter is, if Bennett was so good, fast and all that................what happened to him with the Vikings?! I mean seriously, if the guy was all that and a bag of chips why would they get rid of him in the first place?! Was it the injuries that plagued him or what?! IMO, I like the RB situation here in Houston as it is now, if we bring in Bennett that will only get DD down like we don't think he's that good which IMO he is a damn good RB just needs the team behind him, first of all the line just has to better than it has ever been since we drafted those dudes in the draft so thats a good step.:highfive:

He got a lot of playing time at the end of the year after he passed up Mewelde Moore on the depth chart. In the last 5 games of the year (in 2 he didn't get much playing time) he had 58 carries for 273 yards and 3 TDs, that's 4.7 ypc. He also had a reception TD. That's not too bad. So that's what happened to him while he was on the Vikings.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:05 PM
Well, I have seen Bennett play, although he has been on :crutch: more often.

At the sports bar that I go to, to watch Texans games, there are about 15 to 20 Vikings fans that watch them play on the next TV. They all liked Bennett, but almost to a man, they had mentioned to me that they would love to have DD instead.

Personally, I like Bennett, but I do like DD better. DD just seems to break more tackles and get those extra yards.

exactly....Bennett is faster and probably a better athlete....actually i'm certain he is....but he isn't a better back....i would love for someone to pull up some numbers....but from my experience of watching him....if he gets nicked in any way at or before the line....its not going to be a run worth more than 2-3 yards ever.

Porky
05-11-2006, 10:07 PM
Bennett has had injury problems no question. And, because of that, it's probable he never is a true feature back again. I accept that. I still say it's a toss up on who lines up on opening day on the first drive, but whomever starts, I see these guys splitting carries IF the trade gets done. My point is which guy is more talented when healthy. That's all. Not who has been more productive, not who is more well liked, not who has the bigger contract. Not which guy has better initials, a better number, or more longevity. Just who has more talent WHEN healthy. I think on that question, the choice is clear. Bennett in 08! :redtowel:

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:07 PM
ok....who has a viking forum account....we are going to try this from all angles....anybody got a NO account....

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:08 PM
Bennett has had injury problems no question. And, because of that, it's probable he never is a true feature back again. I accept that. I still say it's a toss up on who lines up on opening day on the first drive, but whomever starts, I see these guys splitting carries IF the trade gets done. My point is which guy is more talented when healthy. That's all. Not who has been more productive, not who is more well liked, not who has the bigger contract. Not which guy has better initials, a better number, or more longevity. Just who has more talent WHEN healthy. I think on that question, the choice is clear. Bennett in 08! :redtowel:

oh come on....DD has the better initials no contest. lol. you take Bennett and i'll take Davis and hopefully the trade will go through....should be interesting.

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 10:09 PM
who said he doesn't have talent?! i know he has talent....but if the guy was a better RB than DD and everyone in the league thought so....i guarantee he would have found a better offer than 2 years 3 million....its common sense....someone so great would find a biter....for instance....Al Davis would have been all over him....potential and low money....but he got paid exactly what the NFL thinks he is now....a backup RB. but anyways....if the deal gets done....we will see who starts on opening day.

I know you know and I know he has talent, I'm just saying it wasn't any lack of talent that gave him that contract. It was the fact that he is basically injury prone and the Vikings didn't really feel the need to wait for him to get healthy anymore (considering they got Chester Taylor and Mewelde Moore is going to be good).

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 10:10 PM
ok....who has a viking forum account....we are going to try this from all angles....anybody got a NO account....

lol :whip: try bugmenot.com

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:12 PM
I know you know and I know he has talent, I'm just saying it wasn't any lack of talent that gave him that contract. It was the fact that he is basically injury prone and the Vikings didn't really feel the need to wait for him to get healthy anymore (considering they got Chester Taylor and Mewelde Moore is going to be good).

i understand what your saying....like i said....hopefully the trade will go through....because i do think Bennett is a very interesting player to have....me with Culpepper and him on Madden....forget about it....

but if it goes down we will see opening day....just another thing to look forward to i guess.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:13 PM
lol :whip: try bugmenot.com

lol...anybody interested in seeing what they would have to say....other than me Porky and TexanFan....i just have entirely too much time apparently.

TexanFan881
05-11-2006, 10:17 PM
i understand what your saying....like i said....hopefully the trade will go through....because i do think Bennett is a very interesting player to have....me with Culpepper and him on Madden....forget about it....

but if it goes down we will see opening day....just another thing to look forward to i guess.

Imagine if we traded DD for Bennett. Now that's a different way to look at it. I think I'd have to :hunter: myself if we did that considering the risk with Bennett.

HomeBred_Texan
05-11-2006, 10:18 PM
lol...anybody interested in seeing what they would have to say....other than me Porky and TexanFan....i just have entirely too much time apparently.
I am interested. But are yall talking about trading DD for him?

I just don't get the point to all of this. So I must be missing something here. DD is injury prone because he get's his rear end worked off. When he goes down, we need to put someone in and not miss a beat. Is that person Bennet? I don't know. But when he came out of college, he was a stud horse if I remember right...

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:20 PM
Yeah i was going to bring in that comparison a second ago....because it seemed to make the argument really obvious....but yeah that has a ton to do with the injury factor. its not that i feel bennett isn't a good back when healthy....he just never could be an every down back in the NFL....not just ebcause of the injury factor...but the way he runs....its just not conducive to any sort of inside running game. and i also think we here on this board devalue DD a lot....guy won rookie of the year....and no matter how many games he has missed because of being nicked up....he always has come in right away and put up numbers....i know teams everywhere else notice it.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:22 PM
I am interested. But are yall talking about trading DD for him?

I just don't get the point to all of this. So I must be missing something here. DD is injury prone because he get's his rear end worked off. When he goes down, we need to put someone in and not miss a beat. Is that person Bennet? I don't know. But when he came out of college, he was a stud horse if I remember right...

lol well at this point we are basically just trying to come to a concensus on what the rest of the NFL fans think....which, Davis or Bennett, is a better RB when healthy

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:24 PM
i'm pretty much just going to hope they trade goes down (because our team will be better off with it regardless of who is better) and then hope we get an answer on opening day....and also pray Lundy doesn't end up beating out everyone. because that would be disappointing on so many different levels.....and shut everyone up.

Scooter
05-11-2006, 10:27 PM
Bennett is faster and probably a better athlete....but he isn't a better back

that's it in a nutshell. the best arguement for bennett so far, is his prospect profile coming out of college. not to hurt any feelings, but that was 6 years ago ... bennett will be 28 before the season starts. the vikings have run an extremely weak running back by committee, and are hardly known for their RB's. if he was as good as DD, even healthy, he'd be a featured back. both are injury proned to an extent (DD to a much lesser extent, as he's averaged 230+ carries every season), but i cant find a single statistical area that michael bennett beats DD in. and DD is running behind the worst line, and one of the worst coaches in football. i fail to see where this even merits an arguement.

i have watched several games from bennett, and i have a lot of trouble seeing how he fits our new system.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:29 PM
that's it in a nutshell. the best arguement for bennett so far, is his prospect profile coming out of college. not to hurt any feelings, but that was 6 years ago ... bennett will be 28 before the season starts. the vikings have run an extremely weak running back by committee, and are hardly known for their RB's. if he was as good as DD, even healthy, he'd be a featured back. both are injury proned to an extent (DD to a much lesser extent, as he's averaged 230+ carries every season), but i cant find a single statistical area that michael bennett beats DD in. and DD is running behind the worst line, and one of the worst coaches in football. i fail to see where this even merits an arguement.

i have watched several games from bennett, and i have a lot of trouble seeing how he fits our new system.

your right. i think the whole league realizes now he can't be a feature....and doesn't fit in to anyone's system....which makes him an interesting sub....but not an interesting starter RB.

HomeBred_Texan
05-11-2006, 10:31 PM
and DD is running behind the worst line, and one of the worst coaches in football. i fail to see where this even merits an arguement.

i have watched several games from bennett, and i have a lot of trouble seeing how he fits our new system.
Well IMHO, our O-Line was very good in run blocking but was very poor in pass blocking. Wasn't that the case? Just an observation...

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:34 PM
Well IMHO, our O-Line was very good in run blocking but was very poor in pass blocking. Wasn't that the case? Just an observation...

yeah the pass block was way worse....but the run blocking wasn't top 10 or anything by any means....it just wasn't dead last like our pass block.

Hulk75
05-11-2006, 10:40 PM
ok....who has a viking forum account....we are going to try this from all angles....anybody got a NO account....
Yea I would like to here what a Viking fan has to say about this guy, make it a GOOD source too, not some slap.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 10:51 PM
Yea I would like to here what a Viking fan has to say about this guy, make it a GOOD source too, not some slap.

yeah i can't find a login for it at bugmenot.com....tomorrow i may set up an account.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 11:00 PM
http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=395075#395075

got one for this forum....

Scooter
05-11-2006, 11:08 PM
Well IMHO, our O-Line was very good in run blocking but was very poor in pass blocking. Wasn't that the case? Just an observation...

i like numbers

behind the EXACT same line, and pulling their best stats opposing DD (02 & 03) ...

Stacey Mack - 253 yards, 2.7pyc, 4td ... 55 receiving yards

Jonothan Wells - 529 yards, 2.7ypc, 3td .. 48 receiving yards

James Allan - 519 yards, 3.3ypc, 0td ... 302 receiving yards

Domanick Davis - 1031 yards, 4.3ypc, 8td ... 351 receiving yards (as a rookie, in 14 games)

no, our run blocking isnt any good. domanick davis made it look respectable.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 11:09 PM
well...about 30 views and all of 2 votes....pretty much a failed experiment. hey call me biased but i'm going to chalk that up to the fact that none of them really want to vote against an ex-teammate....i mean think about if someone from an opposing forum came over asking the question....we probably wouldn't feel like admitting....yeah your RB is better....

and yes i realize that is all speculation....but it isn't completely unwarranted.

Bobo
05-11-2006, 11:12 PM
DD. He doesnt get injured as much. He has proved himself to me. The FO thought DD was good enough to pass on Reggie Bush. I doubt that would have done that for Michael Bennet

Good analysis. I agree.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 11:14 PM
Where in the hell are these other 4 votes for Bennett coming from?! I mean....i've got Porky's and TexanFan's reason....but i don't know how 4 other people could feel the same really. Well 3 other people....1 was a mistake by Hulk.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 11:32 PM
http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=395094#395094

as of right now....5 votes for Davis....none for Bennett....although something tells me things are about to get ugly....i sort of got mad and brought up the whole Culpepper thing.

bdiddy
05-11-2006, 11:40 PM
Bennett would be a great addition. He adds a deminsion that none of our current backs have, SPEED. Having DD and Bennett as a two-headed monster would give us a lot of the benefits we would have enjoyed with Bush. Obviously, not nearly at the level we could have had but you have to do a little cost-benefit analysis DD+Bennett is much more economical and still a great deal of talent and allowed us to address one of our biggest areas of need DE.

thunderkyss
05-11-2006, 11:45 PM
Bennett has had injury problems no question. And, because of that, it's probable he never is a true feature back again. I accept that. I still say it's a toss up on who lines up on opening day on the first drive, but whomever starts, I see these guys splitting carries IF the trade gets done. My point is which guy is more talented when healthy. That's all. Not who has been more productive, not who is more well liked, not who has the bigger contract. Not which guy has better initials, a better number, or more longevity. Just who has more talent WHEN healthy. I think on that question, the choice is clear. Bennett in 08! :redtowel:
no, you said who was the better running back when healthy. That would include durability..... taking it between the tackles, like a real football team does, and grinding it out for 4 quarters.....

Bennette can't get the job done...... that's why he can't stay healthy, that's why he's a backup.....

DD is a better back..... 4th and 1....... DD's in the game, Bennett is on the sideline.......

gee, that sounds familiar.......

thunderkyss
05-11-2006, 11:52 PM
Well IMHO, our O-Line was very good in run blocking but was very poor in pass blocking. Wasn't that the case? Just an observation...

Even in his rookie season, he was getting better runs than the two starters ahead of him........ DD's a hoss..... This past year, it appears that our run blocking has gotten better, Where Vernand & Wells have shown to be as productive as Domanick.

But I wouldn't say we have the #1 run blocking line or anything. DD still has to get his.

JAXwithanX
05-11-2006, 11:55 PM
http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=395118#395118

everyone should check that thread out....lol...got pretty interesting....


not sure if you need to log in to view it.....

skillz24
05-12-2006, 12:13 AM
bennette is almost as big a ***** as buchanon when it comes to getting hit. it doeswn't matter if he is healthy or not he is fragile...:crutch:. you might as well give me pads and put me behind jamel cook!

JAXwithanX
05-12-2006, 12:36 AM
Alright....so far...11 votes DD....1 vote Bennett....and i'm willing to bet if you read all the thread you can figure out who that probably was....lol

Overall a really interesting thread over there.....suggest anyone interested in this thread to read it....

bugmenot - obviously being me.

http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=395156

TexanFan881
05-12-2006, 06:40 AM
I'm trying to get on vikingsmessageboard.com. It looks like that one and the one you were on are the only MBs that the Vikings really have.

TexanBorn51
05-12-2006, 07:32 AM
Davis has my vote. His record shows good whether hurt of not and is proven especially with the same team. I can't base it on health. Everyone and anyone can get hurt. Some play hurt while playing and noone realizes it unless told and sometimes they play just as good if not better. The extent of injury and the recovery process time is also important. DD is proven he knows Carr's moves, instincts, and handling(ball transfer and pass) and had some time with reading Morency. Bennett is good too but for me RB's are always out there and will be out there. They get banged up alot. I say see what we produce this year which will be better than ever before and patience later(draft, trade, FA) will bring another RB if needed. I think if you were to try new acquisitions at this point why not another OL or Defense. Why settle for second best just wait a little for something better later.That's what mama used to tell me..:fans:

HJam72
05-12-2006, 08:12 AM
Have we tried DAVID at RB? He might be better at that. :tease:

Kaiser Toro
05-12-2006, 08:14 AM
Have we tried DAVID at RB? He might be better at that. :tease:

I think we should see if he can play QB first in the new system, before we move him to RB.

HJam72
05-12-2006, 08:16 AM
I think we should see if he can play QB first in the new system, before we move him to RB.

That's funny because I was thought about you when I decided to joke at his expense. :)

real
05-12-2006, 08:50 AM
DD. if he stays healthy, his production as a starter equals more than 2000 yards total offense. bennett's a homerun guy, but has done so with an established line and getting his yards in junktime & passing downs. if you can argue for dd's production, james allan average 3.3 yards per carry & stacey mack averaged 2.7ypc ... while DD averaged 4.3 as a rookie behind the exact same line & coach. he's also held up for 230+ carries every season (and 300+ once), while bennett has only crossed 200 once. also, despite being a "homerun" guy, bennett's even weaker in the touchdown department (12 in 5 years, dd has 23 in 3) and is not as strong as a pass catching option.


I hate stats...

Malloy
05-12-2006, 09:31 AM
Best poll for a long time :)

JAXwithanX
05-12-2006, 01:27 PM
That's funny because I was thought about you when I decided to joke at his expense. :)

probably would have been a little funnier if i wouldn't have addressed the mistake in the 2nd post on the thread....and pretty much throughout the whole thread.

TexanFan881
05-12-2006, 02:16 PM
It might be the picture or me, but does anyone think he looks like Will Smith(Fresh Prince)?

Maybe a little bit, but not really lol

TexanFan881
05-14-2006, 11:25 AM
http://www.purplepride.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=395075#395075

got one for this forum....

I finally got my account activated and I posted one on their other message board. :redtowel:

http://www.vikingsmessageboard.com/viewtopic.php?p=108541#108541

JAXwithanX
05-14-2006, 07:16 PM
I finally got my account activated and I posted one on their other message board. :redtowel:

http://www.vikingsmessageboard.com/viewtopic.php?p=108541#108541

looks like overwhelmingly the same results....i think we can just stop all the talk about Bennett being the starter now. Bennett - situational back. we here don't realize that at least 90% of the league holds DD on a pretty high pedestal as far as RB's go. we over here are just are all too busy trying to convince and pray that all David Carr needs is a line.

TexanFan881
05-14-2006, 07:38 PM
looks like overwhelmingly the same results....i think we can just stop all the talk about Bennett being the starter now. Bennett - situational back. we here don't realize that at least 90% of the league holds DD on a pretty high pedestal as far as RB's go. we over here are just are all too busy trying to convince and pray that all David Carr needs is a line.

Yes, that's the way I am beginning to look at it now too. I'm not going to let my opinion override the opinion of fans that watched him plenty of the last few years. A lot of them did say that he would be a great addition for us, and after looking at this thread and past posts, it seems like he's got great character and attitude and it sounds like he would fit in perfectly here. It makes me really hope that he comes here.

JAXwithanX
05-15-2006, 02:54 AM
Yeah I definitely think he'll be a great addition to the team....he is a super athlete and imagine he will probably break off some off the better plays for the Texans next year (of course if this all goes down).

stevo3883
05-15-2006, 02:12 PM
Bennett has speed like Mathis and would be amazing on dump offs from Carr.

DominickDavisFan76
05-15-2006, 04:53 PM
I picked Domanick Davis for obvious reasons, but I wont be surprised if Michael Bennett got some plays because Gary is trying to fit back into the system he had in Denver with Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell.

Hmm... I believe that was a pretty good system so they both will make an impact on the Texans

Good Job Gary!:cool:

jdog
05-15-2006, 07:02 PM
Okay, let's make this fair. I said when completely healthy Bennett is the better back. That should be the criteria. Obviousely, health has been an issue. Secondly, it's not exactly objective asking a bunch of Texans homers. That's like asking showing a man a picture of his wife and Eva Longeria, and expecting him to say Eva is prettier when the wife is standing there. Half these people have probably never seen Bennett play. Not objective! :hides:

Domanick Davis is not standing here, and I would definitely say Eva is prettier without my wife standing here. Domanick is a better running back. If you want to say Bennett is better when he is healthy, then I would say Davis is better when he is stepping into the endzone.