PDA

View Full Version : Anyone Here Still Think Not Signing Benson Wasn't A Mistake?


TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 08:31 PM
Suppose Ced could have gotten a yard against the Cards?

Dude leads the league in rushing yards.

1. Cedric Benson CIN 487
2. Adrian Peterson MIN 481
3. Chris Johnson TEN 468
4. Steven Jackson STL 451
5. Ahmad Bradshaw NYG 375

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 08:39 PM
He saw an opportunity for more carries in Cincinnati, both teams made offers, he took the bigger workload because it gives him a better chance to showcase for his next contract in 2 years.

Its easy to look back now and call it a mistake.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 08:41 PM
Its easy to look back now and call it a mistake.

Some of us called it a mistake then. Just sayin'....

BattleRedToro
10-12-2009, 08:43 PM
Some of us called it a mistake then. Just sayin'....

If my memory serves me correctly, the Bengals offered him more money that the Texans did.

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 08:45 PM
If my memory serves me correctly, the Bengals offered him more money that the Texans did.

More money and more carries.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 08:45 PM
If my memory serves me correctly, the Bengals offered him more money that the Texans did.

Not much more.

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 08:49 PM
When Benson signed his Bengals deal he was looking at his NEXT contract. Thats why he signed for just 2 years with a team offering a starting job and more carries.

ATXtexanfan
10-12-2009, 08:51 PM
Suppose Ced could have gotten a yard against the Cards?

Dude leads the league in rushing yards.

1. Cedric Benson CIN 487
2. Adrian Peterson MIN 481
3. Chris Johnson TEN 468
4. Steven Jackson STL 451
5. Ahmad Bradshaw NYG 375

you gonna bring the entire bengal O plus O coaching staff? don't think the problem is the RB. that's way to simple.

Runner
10-12-2009, 08:53 PM
If my memory serves me correctly, the Bengals offered him more money that the Texans did.

That was the second go round between seasons. The Texans could have had him as a street free agent during the season last year. They could have done a relatively low two year contract, non-guaranteed. Teams do that all of the time. There would be no risk if he didn't work out. The Texans had him in, but they didn't like the cut of his jib. Beer drinker you know.

Smithiak would pour millions into Ahman Green who had no future but wouldn't risk a few hundred thousand on Benson, who had a chance at a future. Again, this was before the Bengals pcked him up the first time.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 08:54 PM
When Benson signed his Bengals deal he was looking at his NEXT contract. Thats why he signed for just 2 years with a team offering a starting job and more carries.

Not sure what that means.

Benson would have come to the Texans for a little more money.

To me, back in March, it was a no-brainer. And now, watching this organization trying to run a dud like Chris Brown up the middle and not getting a yard, it's even more obvious Smithiak screwed the pooch on the deal.

Runner
10-12-2009, 08:54 PM
you gonna bring the entire bengal O plus O coaching staff? don't think the problem is the RB. that's way to simple.

Do you really think the league's leading rusher wouldn't be a good addition to the team?

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 08:55 PM
you gonna bring the entire bengal O plus O coaching staff? don't think the problem is the RB. that's way to simple.

Now your point is one I can agree with. The Texans have a bigger problem than just lack of a power running back.

Still, I'm betting Ced could have gotten the yard against the Cards.

Runner
10-12-2009, 09:00 PM
Now your point is one I can agree with. The Texans have a bigger problem than just lack of a power running back.

Still, I'm betting Ced could have gotten the yard against the Cards.

Power running back? It is starting to look like theTexans could use help for Slaton as the full time running back.

ATXtexanfan
10-12-2009, 09:02 PM
Do you really think the league's leading rusher wouldn't be a good addition to the team?

will the little holes open up to lanes just because benson is in the backfield? cassell was a baller in NE last year, not so much in KC this year. see my point? don't think anyone on that list has the same numbers in our O. same benson who bear fans would spit on.
p.s. what happened to randy moss in oakland?

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:05 PM
Power running back? It is starting to look like theTexans could use help for Slaton as the full time running back.'

Yep.

And even with the great season Slaton had last year, nobody with any sense thought it was a guarantee he would repeat his success this year.

Benson would have been happy to be back in Texas and he was looking for a little more money.

The Texans have overpaid a hell of a lot worse than Ced. They could have sweetened the pot a little bit.

Dumb move.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:07 PM
will the little holes open up to lanes just because benson is in the backfield? cassell was a baller in NE last year, not so much in KC this year. see my point? don't think anyone on that list has the same numbers in our O. same benson who bear fans would spit on.
p.s. what happened to randy moss in oakland?

The Texans O-line has had its issues this season, but Slaton hasn't been hitting the holes he's been given a lot of the time either.

MannyFresh
10-12-2009, 09:08 PM
I'll wait till Jacquizz Rodgers comes out....hopefully the Texans will see his potential then what UT, A&M, and all other Texas schools ignored to see...ask Cushing, even he had problems with him.

MojoMan
10-12-2009, 09:08 PM
Cedric Benson would not have made any difference on that last play. There was nothing there. It was not the running back's fault.

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 09:09 PM
'

Yep.

And even with the great season Slaton had last year, nobody with any sense thought it was a guarantee he would repeat his success this year.

Benson would have been happy to be back in Texas and he was looking for a little more money.

The Texans have overpaid a hell of a lot worse than Ced. They could have sweetened the pot a little bit.

Dumb move.


It wasn't about the money on THIS contract. It was about OPPORTUNITY. He stands to make more money in 2 years when he's a free agent as a starter for these next 2 years getting 20+ carries with the Bengals than here as a backup getting maaaaybbe 10+ carries a game. It wasn't about the few hundred thousand dollar difference between CIN and HOU's offers. It was the 100-200 carries difference over the next 2 years.

Runner
10-12-2009, 09:11 PM
you gonna bring the entire bengal O plus O coaching staff? don't think the problem is the RB. that's way to simple.

will the little holes open up to lanes just because benson is in the backfield? cassell was a baller in NE last year, not so much in KC this year. see my point? don't think anyone on that list has the same numbers in our O. same benson who bear fans would spit on.

It is impossible to improve the running game without a new o-line and coaching staff? Sounds like the passing game with Carr at QB and Capers coaching.

The Texans are in worse shape than I thought if that is true.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:13 PM
It wasn't about the money on THIS contract. It was about OPPORTUNITY. He stands to make more money in 2 years when he's a free agent as a starter for these next 2 years getting 20+ carries with the Bengals than here as a backup getting maaaaybbe 10+ carries a game. It wasn't about the few hundred thousand dollar difference between CIN and HOU's offers. It was the 100-200 carries difference over the next 2 years.

I disagree. The lure of being close to home AND more money would have landed him.

If Benson had any confidence in his ability, and I'm sure he did and does, he likely would have considered his chances to at least split carries with Slaton to be pretty good.

And now, let's face it, Benson would likely be the starter in Houston.

Texan4Ever
10-12-2009, 09:14 PM
No one couldv'e known Benson would have a breakout season thus far. Most teams look at what a players accomplished in his career up to this point and for Benson it hasn't been much. Now, if he is able to keep up his production for a few years then great for him but IMO, he's just a one hit wonder.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:17 PM
No one couldv'e known Benson would have a breakout season thus far.

I'm not going to say I KNEW he would be leading the league in rushing at this stage of the season. But I did KNOW it was a mistake to let him get away for lack of a few bucks.

Runner
10-12-2009, 09:22 PM
It wasn't about the money on THIS contract. It was about OPPORTUNITY.

That's not my point. Smith and Kubiak absolutley blew it the first time, when they were the only team he was talking to and could have had him at low money and low risk. Had they made the right decision then, they wouldn't have had to bid against the Bengals the second time.

I guess they were confident Green would be off the injured list soon. :rolleyes:

Propping up those old players helped put the Texans into the depth problem they have today. Talking about the second approach to Benson without addressing the first is spin. Obviously Smith and Kubiak realized they made a mistake, since they offered Benson a good deal of money the second time around.

markn
10-12-2009, 09:22 PM
Anyone Here Still Think Not Signing Benson Wasn't A Mistake?

- I couldn't fail to disagree less!


Seriously, why don't we try Vonta in short yardage situations?

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 09:28 PM
What's the point with this thread?...Kubiak pretty much already said hindsight is 20/20, so even he acknowledged it was a mistake...case closed

Second Benson doesn't play on this team so we shouldn't have a "Cedric Benson" thread in the Texans Talk forum...move it to the NFL forum.

Also if anybody thinks Benson would be having the same success on this team that he's currently enjoying in Cincinatti, they're puffing the magic dragon. The Texans' Oline struggles to open up holes in the running game, Benson would be dodging tacklers in the backfield here. For all we know he would be the same player here that he was in Chicago. I mean think about it......Cincinatti's scheme/personel obviously fits his game, that's why he's no longer a NFL bust and enjoying a break out season.

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 09:31 PM
What's the point with this thread?...Kubiak pretty much already said hindsight is 20/20, so even he acknowledged it was a mistake...case closed

Second Benson doesn't play on this team so we shouldn't have a "Cedric Benson" thread in the Texans Talk forum...move it to the NFL forum.

Also if anybody thinks Benson would be having the same success on this team that he's enjoying in Cincinatti they're puffing the magic dragon. The Texans' Oline struggles to open up holes in the running game, Benson would be dodging tacklers in the backfield. For all we know he would be the same player here that he was in Chicago. I mean think about it......Cincinatti's scheme/personel obviously fits his game, that's why he's no longer a NFL bust.

Carr Bombed, we agree for once LOL. Its childish to look at league leading rushing stats and say "D'oh! We coulda signed that guy and he'd have those same yards here!"

Runner
10-12-2009, 09:34 PM
What's the point with this thread?...Kubiak pretty much already said hindsight is 20/20, so even he acknowledged it was a mistake...case closed

Second Benson doesn't play on this team so we shouldn't have a "Cedric Benson" thread in the Texans Talk forum...move it to the NFL forum.

Also if anybody thinks Benson would be having the same success on this team that he's enjoying in Cincinatti they're puffing the magic dragon. The Texans' Oline struggles to open up holes in the running game, Benson would be dodging tacklers in the backfield. For all we know he would be the same player here that he was in Chicago. I mean think about it......Cincinatti's scheme/personel obviously fits his game, that's why he's no longer a NFL bust.


This is in this forum because we are discussing Smith's and Kubiak's decision making. I know this is in part risky, since Smith's performance seems like some sort of sacred cow around here.

================

Does it bother anyone that people are looking up at Cincinnati's coaching and offensive line and saying "If only......."

They were below us for so long; this slow and steady doesn't seem to be working. Another nail in the coffin of "The Right Way".

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:38 PM
IT WASN'T ABOUT A FEW BUCKS. IT WAS ABOUT 100-200 CARRIES MORE HE'D BE GETTING IN CINCY OVER THE NEXT 2 YEARS.

Christ dude, read posts before you argue against them.

Sorry to get you so frustrated, but I could make the same suggestion to you.

Ced would have had the same opportunity here, with Slaton spinning his wheels, to get those extra carries.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:40 PM
Anyone Here Still Think Not Signing Benson Wasn't A Mistake?

- I couldn't fail to disagree less!




LOL I admit I struggled with the wording of the thread title.

Runner
10-12-2009, 09:40 PM
Carr Bombed, we agree for once LOL. Its childish to look at league leading rushing stats and say "D'oh! We coulda signed that guy and he'd have those same yards here!"

Childish? Try arguing what I've said, not words you are putting in my mouth.

I say adding the league's leading rusher to the Texans would help them.

You imply we'd need the Bengals o-line and and coaching staff along with Benson to make any difference.

Which makes more sense?

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:42 PM
What's the point with this thread?...Kubiak pretty much already said hindsight is 20/20, so even he acknowledged it was a mistake...case closed

I wasn't looking for an admission from Kubiak. I was looking for an admission from some of the members of this board that they were wrong in saying missing on the Benson signing wasn't a missed opportunity.

I would think it would be easy to say it was a mistake now. Obviously not.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 09:54 PM
The Bengals offer was better.

Exactly. The Bengals offered more money AND the opportunity for more carries.

We could have offered more money AND the opportunity to be close to home AND the opportunity for more carries if Slaton got injured or if Benson proved to be the better back.

Bottom line: Smith let Benson go without a fight and it was a mistake.

Not sure why that's so difficult to admit.

Marcus
10-12-2009, 10:04 PM
This is in this forum because we are discussing Smith's and Kubiak's decision making. I know this is in part risky, since Smith's performance seems like some sort of sacred cow around here.

Oh BS Runner. :rolleyes: If you want to dwell on Smith's decisions based on 20/20 hindsight, knock yourself out, but spare the sacred cow shit.

dtran04
10-12-2009, 10:05 PM
Benson was using the Texans to get more money from the Bengals. It worked.

Runner
10-12-2009, 10:15 PM
Oh BS Runner. :rolleyes: If you want to dwell on Smith's decisions based on 20/2o hindsight, knock yourself out, but spare the sacred cow shit.

Sorry - I made the point at the time too. That's not hindsight.

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 10:26 PM
This is in this forum because we are discussing Smith's and Kubiak's decision making. I know this is in part risky, since Smith's performance seems like some sort of scared cow around here.

================

Does it bother anyone that people are looking up at Cincinnati's coaching and offensive line and saying "If only......."

They were below us for so long; this slow and steady doesn't seem to be working. Another nail in the coffin of "The Right Way".



no, the fact we passed him up isn't the issue, I have bigger fish to fry with Smith and he isn't a sacred cow around here either....revisionist history bothers me, you could do this about so many things.

Go ask Cincinnati about Kevin Walter.....I doubt they would've put a 7th round tender on him if they really knew what they had. This stuff happens.

It still belongs in the "NFL forum", I mean should I start a "Anyone here still think drafting Amobi over Willis wasn't a mistake?" ect. A Benson thread is a NFL thread. I mean when Jon Gruden turns out to be a good head coach for whoever hires him, do you want me to start a thread in this forum if we hire someone else instead?

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 10:31 PM
Exactly. The Bengals offered more money AND the opportunity for more carries.

We could have offered more money AND the opportunity to be close to home AND the opportunity for more carries if Slaton got injured or if Benson proved to be the better back.

Bottom line: Smith let Benson go without a fight and it was a mistake.

Not sure why that's so difficult to admit.

LMAO, Slaton just put up almost 1300 yards AS A ROOKIE, The Texans where never going to offer him the "opportunity" for more carries than what the Bengals were able to offer..(Benson was already a starter in Cincy)..nor would Benson have expected them to.

dtran04
10-12-2009, 10:32 PM
I'd rather talk about how the Texans decided to pick up Carr's option instead of trying to sign Drew Brees. :)

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 10:37 PM
LMAO, Slaton just put up almost 1300 yards AS A ROOKIE, The Texans where never going to offer him the "opportunity" for more carries than what the Bengals were able to offer..(Benson was already a starter in Cincy)..nor would Benson have expected them to.

Read the rest of the quote: "....the opportunity for more carries if Slaton got injured or if Benson proved to be the better back.

You think the Texans might be willing to offer Benson more carries than Slaton now?

Runner
10-12-2009, 10:38 PM
no, the fact we past him up isn't the issue, I have bigger fish to fry with Smith and he isn't a sacred cow around here either....revisionist history history bothers me, you could do this about so many things.

Go ask Cincinnati about Kevin Walter.....I doubt they would've put a 7th round tender on him if they really knew what they had. This stuff happens.

It still belongs in the "NFL forum", I mean should I start a "Anyone here still think drafting Amobi over Willis wasn't a mistake?" ect. A Benson thread is a NFL thread.

Well, it's not revisionist history as far as I'm concerned. The low risk/medium reward opportunity the Texans had with him in October of last year was discussed at the time. I'm usually not a big woulda/coulda/shoulda poster; this one just seemed so obvious at the time.

This team has many issues related to depth, and I think many of them trace back to players such as Green, Bedell, the center from Green Bay (I forget his name) that the Texans kept on well past their primes. Sometimes the risk should be taken with relative youth. We still need a center, a guard, and a running back it seems. When they left, the Texans had nothing to backfill their positions with. I think it is worth discussing, without immediate dismissal as hindsight.

====================

That "sacred cow" throwaway line seemed to touch a nerve around here. I'm glad to hear you have fish to fry; can you let us fry our fish too? :)

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 10:39 PM
I wasn't looking for an admission from Kubiak. I was looking for an admission from some of the members of this board that they were wrong in saying missing on the Benson signing wasn't a missed opportunity.

I would think it would be easy to say it was a mistake now. Obviously not.

What?!?

Why the hell would you even care about the "admission" or posters on a message board over the head coach?

"I was looking for an admission from some of the members of this board that they were wrong" :rolleyes:


That sounds like someone who's insecure or something. If the freaking head coached admitted they should have gave him a shot (again after wearing 20/20 glasses) who gives a crap about anybody else has to say.......and this is coming from somebody who wanted Benson over Brown.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 10:44 PM
What?!?

Why the hell would you even care about the "admission" or posters on a message board over the head coach?

"I was looking for an admission from some of the members of this board that they were wrong" :rolleyes:


That sounds like someone who's insecure or something. If the freaking head coached admitted they should have gave him a shot (again after wearing 20/20 glasses) who gives a crap about anybody else has to say.......and this is coming from somebody who wanted Benson over Brown.

You caught me. I'm insecure. Sue me.

But really, it's a message board. Is there really a need to get so melodramatic? We're having a discussion here. Why the histrionics? Why is it necessary to tell me what topics I can and cannot discuss. If you don't like this thread, there are others.

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 10:44 PM
Sure....my fish starts with going into the season with Chris Myers as the starting center (when he proved last year he was a HUGE liability in short yardage situations, drafting a 2nd round project (and I don't care what anybody has to say about Barwin, he's a project...even if he turns out to be a fantastic player...he's still a project why isn't gong to help us win games this season) when you have MUCH more pressing needs (center and safety come to mind..hmm) and needed a "NFL ready prospect", or how about the fact they feel they can fill the safety positin with a 6th round or later pick every damn year...

There, that should be a good start on the "fish" quota.

I just don't think our running game would be THAT much better with Benson...the offensive line is THAT bad.

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 10:47 PM
Read the rest of the quote: "....the opportunity for more carries if Slaton got injured or if Benson proved to be the better back.

You think the Texans might be willing to offer Benson more carries than Slaton now?

Yeah....it's just a shame that the Texans couldn't forsee their starting stud rookie falling off a cliff this season.

Again revisionist history......you're really going to fault them for not wanting to give Benson starting RB money when they had arguably the best rookie runner from a year before.....seriously. Gee, I wonder how many fits people would be throwing if Benson returned back to his Bears days, but we were paying him more than our starting RB?

Runner
10-12-2009, 10:48 PM
I just don't think our running game would be THAT much better with Benson...the offensive line is THAT bad.

Yeah - I'm starting to get that with people looking up to Cincy's coaching and talent. Either the Texans or the Bengals have come a long way - in opposite directions.

I'm still holding out hope that the offense's problems are fixable without an injection of five players and three coaches.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 10:50 PM
Yeah....it's just a shame that the Texans couldn't forsee their starting stud rookie falling off a cliff this season.

Again revisionist history......you're really going to fault them for not wanting to give Benson starting RB money when they had arguably the best rookie runner from a year before.....seriously.

You keep mentioning the point that Slaton was a rookie, but you're not seeing the obvious downside of that. It's not unusual at all that a rookie performs at a high level and then falls off a cliff. In fact, a number of people were concerned Slaton wouldn't duplicate his rookie effort. Looks like they were right.

Runner
10-12-2009, 10:52 PM
You keep mentioning the point that Slaton was a rookie, but you're not seeing the obvious downside of that. It's not unusual at all that a rookie performs at a high level and then falls off a cliff. In fact, a number of people were concerned Slaton wouldn't duplicate his rookie effort. Looks like they were right.

I had full confidence in Slaton at the time. Still do actually; he's still a high quality back. He's only played twenty games as a pro - there will be ups and downs but I think he'll have a good career here.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 10:57 PM
I had full confidence in Slaton at the time. Still do actually; he's still a high quality back. He's only played twenty games as a pro - there will be ups and downs but I think he'll have a good career here.

I was happy when the Texans drafted Slaton. I thought he would surprise people. He did.

I also thought the Texans needed a complement to him. Cedric would have been perfect for that. Paying more than the Bengals still woudn't have broken the bank.

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 11:14 PM
You keep mentioning the point that Slaton was a rookie, but you're not seeing the obvious downside of that. It's not unusual at all that a rookie performs at a high level and then falls off a cliff. In fact, a number of people were concerned Slaton wouldn't duplicate his rookie effort. Looks like they were right.

So according to you, Houston made the mistake of not forseeing the dropoff of a 1200+ yard rookie (one of the easiest transitional positions in the NFL), but they were supposed to forsee the emergence of a running back who was a 1st round bust and never had anything close to the production of that 1200+ yard rookie.........okay, that makes sense.

BTW, I lead the "Slaton is going to have a subpar season" bandwagon (or whatever you want to call it), but what you typed still doesn't make sense. Benson was never going to be signed to be anything more than a backup RB here.

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 11:16 PM
So according to you, Houston made the mistake of not forseeing the dropoff of a 1200+ yard rookie (one of the easiest transitional positions in the NFL), but they were supposed to forsee the emergence of a running back who was a 1st round bust and never had anything close to the production of that 1200+ yard rookie.........okay, that makes sense.

BTW, I lead the "Slaton is going to have a subpar season" bandwagon (or whatever you want to call it), but what you typed still doesn't make sense. Benson was never going to be signed to be anything more than a backup RB here.

Thank you. This is the point I've been driving home all thread. Maybe having it typed in other words and posted by another contributer will help.

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 11:18 PM
Yeah - I'm starting to get that with people looking up to Cincy's coaching and talent. Either the Texans or the Bengals have come a long way - in opposite directions.

I'm still holding out hope that the offense's problems are fixable without an injection of five players and three coaches.

Houston doesn't need 5 players.......they just need a new center and a new guard. (Frankly, they need to drop this soft ass zone scheme crap and get more physical up front....right now they're soft on the Oline) I'm not saying the Bengals Oline is the greatest thing in the NFL, I'm saying it's not Houston's Oline......which is one of the worst. Myers couldn't push his way out of a Chucky Cheese's ballroom packed with toddlers.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 11:20 PM
So according to you, Houston made the mistake of not forseeing the dropoff of a 1200+ yard rookie (one of the easiest transitional positions in the NFL), but they were supposed to forsee the emergence of a running back who was a 1st round bust and never had anything close to the production of that 1200+ yard rookie.........okay, that makes sense.

BTW, I lead the "Slaton is going to have a subpar season" bandwagon (or whatever you want to call it), but what you typed still doesn't make sense. Benson was never going to be signed to be anything more than a backup RB here.

The Texans made a mistake in not seeing what was obvious to the fan writing this post: that Cedric Benson would have made a perfect complement to an undersized running back who had just had a surprisingly good rookie season. The Texans made a mistake not offering Benson a little more money, which might have been enough---combined with the fact that Texas is his home---to get him.

You can parse my words any way you like. What I'm saying isn't that far-fetched or that difficult to understand.

Runner
10-12-2009, 11:22 PM
Well, I guess we all know where each of us stands on this issue. :)

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 11:26 PM
Thank you. This is the point I've been driving home all thread. Maybe having it typed in other words and posted by another contributer will help.

And I was wrong.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 11:28 PM
And I was wrong.

Ah....that's all I was looking for. :turtle:

Carr Bombed
10-12-2009, 11:29 PM
The Texans made a mistake in not seeing what was obvious to the fan writing this post: that Cedric Benson would have made a perfect complement to an undersized running back who had just had a surprisingly good rookie season. The Texans made a mistake not offering Benson a little more money, which might have been enough---combined with the fact that Texas is his home---to get him.

You can parse my words any way you like. What I'm saying isn't that far-fetched or that difficult to understand.

The problem is I didn't forsee Slaton having a dropoff, because "he was undersized". (undersized RBs can still make a good living in this league as a starter.) My problem with Slaton was the added weight......that's why I was worried about the dropoff, mainly because I watched him at WV when he put on some pounds. Slaton is still going to be a good back for us, when he figures out what playing shape he needs to be in when the season starts.

Sorry, but unlike you...I'm not going to fault the Texans for not agressively going after Benson when they thought they already had their stud (and they still might.). Especially when the other back was a disappointment and wasn't living up to his draft status.

Was it a mistake "looking back on it now"? Yes, it was a mistake......Looking back on it now, the coach already admitted as much, don't know why you need more than that.

This is the last post I'm going to make in this thread, because regardless of signing or not Benson....Houston has other problems they need to be focussing on right now. The Oline needs a shake up, players need to feel the heat and be pushed for their starting jobs, and it's time to see if that lineman they spent a 3rd round pick on was a good draft pick or just another pick that we flushed down the drain.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 11:36 PM
The problem is I didn't forsee Slaton having a dropoff, because "he was undersized". (undersized RBs can still make a good living in this league as a starter.) My problem with Slaton was the added weight......that's why I was worried about the dropoff, mainly because I watched him at WV when he put on some pounds. Slaton is still going to be a good back for us, when he figures out what playing shape he needs to be in when the season starts.

Sorry, but unlike you...I'm not going to fault the Texans for not agressively going after Benson when they thought they already had their stud (and they still might.). Especially when the other back was a disappointment and wasn't living up to his draft status.

Was it a mistake "looking back on it now"? Yes, it was a mistake......Looking back on it now, the coach already admitted as much, but if that's not good enough for you and you're looking for people to apologize for their opinion "back then"...I wouldn't hold your breath.

This is the last post I'm going to make in this thread, because regardless of signing or not Benson....Houston has other problems they need to be focussing on right now. The Oline needs a shake up, players need to feel the heat and be pushed for their starting jobs, and it's time to see if that lineman they spent a 3rd round pick on was a good draft pick or just another pick that we flushed down the drain.

And, after all that, you and I really don't have much to disagree on.

The Texans entertained the idea of signing Benson. They saw a need for him and they saw his potential. So much so that they offered him a contract.

I felt like he was worth a bigger push. And I feel like the way this current season has played out so far substantiates this.

TexansFanatic
10-12-2009, 11:37 PM
No message.

DerekLee1
10-13-2009, 12:12 AM
The Texans O-line has had its issues this season, but Slaton hasn't been hitting the holes he's been given a lot of the time either.

Jeebus, I've been saying this since last season now! He's NOT the guy for a ZBS. Game-changing ability? Sure! But in a ZBS, you HAVE to be able to see the hole before it even opens. Slaton dances too much behind the line to be a one-cut back. That's why Ryan Moats - with inferior ability - often looks better. Slaton is a GREAT 3rd down back with this team, but we really need a premiere one-cut back on this team. In fact, I'd say it's more important than a safety or DT at this juncture.

TexansFanatic
10-13-2009, 12:16 AM
Jeebus, I've been saying this since last season now! He's NOT the guy for a ZBS. Game-changing ability? Sure! But in a ZBS, you HAVE to be able to see the hole before it even opens. Slaton dances too much behind the line to be a one-cut back. That's why Ryan Moats - with inferior ability - often looks better. Slaton is a GREAT 3rd down back with this team, but we really need a premiere one-cut back on this team. In fact, I'd say it's more important than a safety or DT at this juncture.

Welcome to the discussion. It's been a lively one. ;-))

DerekLee1
10-13-2009, 12:21 AM
Welcome to the discussion. It's been a lively one. ;-))

WELCOME?!? Holy crap. I was ready to trade the draft Ditka-style for Adrian Peterson 2 years ago, and people thought I was nuts!

TexansFanatic
10-13-2009, 12:28 AM
WELCOME?!? Holy crap. I was ready to trade the draft Ditka-style for Adrian Peterson 2 years ago, and people thought I was nuts!

I wouldn't have thought you were nuts.

From draft one I've been waiting for this team to draft a franchise running back. Peterson was taken just three spots ahead of Amobi Okoye. We get Peterson we're in the playoffs two years ago.

DerekLee1
10-13-2009, 12:35 AM
I wouldn't have thought you were nuts.

From draft one I've been waiting for this team to draft a franchise running back. Peterson was taken just three spots ahead of Amobi Okoye. We get Peterson we're in the playoffs two years ago.

*sigh* wishful thinking. I'd take AD/Travis Johnson/DelJuan Robinson over Slaton/Okoye/Cody right now.

BigBull17
10-13-2009, 08:05 AM
That was the second go round between seasons. The Texans could have had him as a street free agent during the season last year. They could have done a relatively low two year contract, non-guaranteed. Teams do that all of the time. There would be no risk if he didn't work out. The Texans had him in, but they didn't like the cut of his jib. Beer drinker you know.

Smithiak would pour millions into Ahman Green who had no future but wouldn't risk a few hundred thousand on Benson, who had a chance at a future. Again, this was before the Bengals pcked him up the first time.

So could 30 other teams. Whats your point? He's having a great season, but come on. He was an average running back who gets suspended next time he screws up.

El Tejano
10-13-2009, 09:06 AM
I will hold judgement until I see The Bengals and Benson win a playoff game before we do.

Runner
10-13-2009, 09:20 AM
I will hold judgement until I see The Bengals and Benson win a playoff game before we do.

If the Bengals - we formerly called them the Bungles here - even make the playoffs while the Texans languish near 8-8 again, I think the entire Texans organization could be questioned, not just a single deal.

BigBull17
10-13-2009, 09:23 AM
If the Bengals - we formerly called them the Bungles here - even make the playoffs while the Texans languish near 8-8 again, I think the entire Texans organization could be questioned, not just a single deal.

Thats my thing. If we don't win, its not because we missed on Benson, we just haven't built a team that can win. When you watch the games, you don't say, "man, if we had this one guy, we would be 4-1/5-0. We need 2 safties, a corner, 2-3 DT's, new guard, new center, new Rb, ect... We have more weaknesses than just back up RB. Or starting RB.

El Tejano
10-13-2009, 09:27 AM
But what if we start winning? I mean, look at our season. Despite a bad defensive effort for the first 3 weeks or so, we are only 2 goaline stands away from 4-1.

Runner
10-13-2009, 09:35 AM
If the Bengals - we formerly called them the Bungles here - even make the playoffs while the Texans languish near 8-8 again, I think the entire Texans organization could be questioned, not just a single deal.

Thats my thing. If we don't win, its not because we missed on Benson, we just haven't built a team that can win. When you watch the games, you don't say, "man, if we had this one guy, we would be 4-1/5-0. We need 2 safties, a corner, 2-3 DT's, new guard, new center, new Rb, ect... We have more weaknesses than just back up RB. Or starting RB.

I agree with you too. I've never said that if the Texans had Benson the team would be miraculously fixed. I said they'd be better with a better player though, and he's better than most running backs they have on the roster. (I still think Slaton is better than Benson).

I've been trying to discuss Benson in this thread as one example of the bigger underlying problem that leads to a lack of talent on the Texans. The mention of Cedric's name is apparently very polarizing and seems to anger posters though. That polarization stopped any meaningful discussion from taking place.

HOU-TEX
10-13-2009, 09:48 AM
I admit, I think I might've been against Ced coming here at the time. He's turned his career around nicely. Good for him.

El Tejano
10-13-2009, 09:54 AM
You can't compare Cincy to The Texans. They had a couple of bad years because they were forced to play with bad QBs due to injury. They were a playoff team before that.

HOU-TEX
10-13-2009, 10:05 AM
You can't compare Cincy to The Texans. They had a couple of bad years because they were forced to play with bad QBs due to injury. They were a playoff team before that.

Yeah, it wasn't just their QB. I think it was last year they had to bring in LBs off the street due to so many injuries.

Runner
10-13-2009, 10:16 AM
You can't compare Cincy to The Texans. They had a couple of bad years because they were forced to play with bad QBs due to injury. They were a playoff team before that.


Yes, I heard this reason about most, if not all, of the teams that passed the Texans last year. It seems the only teams that ever improve are those that were "good but had an off year or two". I don't recall any team that has been compared to the Texans without that comparison being deemed unfair by someone.

It seems rather defeatist to state (by implication) that the Texans can't make the playoff jump because they've never been good before.

GP
10-13-2009, 10:16 AM
I agree with you too. I've never said that if the Texans had Benson the team would be miraculously fixed. I said they'd be better with a better player though, and he's better than most running backs they have on the roster. (I still think Slaton is better than Benson).

I've been trying to discuss Benson in this thread as one example of the bigger underlying problem that leads to a lack of talent on the Texans. The mention of Cedric's name is apparently very polarizing and seems to anger posters though. That polarization stopped any meaningful discussion from taking place.

I was clearly for us bringing the guy in. I was very disappointed when we didn't even give him a sniff the FIRST time, when (as you said) we couldn't be bidding against anyone but ourselves.

This is easily one of the worst non-acquisitions that this franchise screwed up. I think it was a combination of McNair morality and ethics belief system, as well as Kubiak's arrogance that he already had all the RBs he needed. In fact, I would describe Kubiak's initial reaction--to the news that Benson "might" be trying out for the Texans--as being "Kubiak chortled" at the idea. As if Benson planted the information, and as if the Texans would rather suck the tailpipe of a running car than to allow him to try out.

Maybe this team needs five more olinemen on the roster who are big, huge fat guys who are used for short yardage situations? Bring in the heavies. Have a zone-blocking set and a 3rd/4th and 1 set.

Not even sure if Benson could get the yards with this oline's tendency for finesse.

BigBull17
10-13-2009, 10:44 AM
I agree with you too. I've never said that if the Texans had Benson the team would be miraculously fixed. I said they'd be better with a better player though, and he's better than most running backs they have on the roster. (I still think Slaton is better than Benson).

I've been trying to discuss Benson in this thread as one example of the bigger underlying problem that leads to a lack of talent on the Texans. The mention of Cedric's name is apparently very polarizing and seems to anger posters though. That polarization stopped any meaningful discussion from taking place.

I didn't mind us talking to him, and wouldn't have minded us signing him, but they offered more than we wanted to pay. I agree he is better than everyone not named Slaton on this roster. It's just a little silly to get upset with us passing on him, since 30 other teams did too.

BigBull17
10-13-2009, 10:46 AM
I was clearly for us bringing the guy in. I was very disappointed when we didn't even give him a sniff the FIRST time, when (as you said) we couldn't be bidding against anyone but ourselves.

This is easily one of the worst non-acquisitions that this franchise screwed up. I think it was a combination of McNair morality and ethics belief system, as well as Kubiak's arrogance that he already had all the RBs he needed. In fact, I would describe Kubiak's initial reaction--to the news that Benson "might" be trying out for the Texans--as being "Kubiak chortled" at the idea. As if Benson planted the information, and as if the Texans would rather suck the tailpipe of a running car than to allow him to try out.

Maybe this team needs five more olinemen on the roster who are big, huge fat guys who are used for short yardage situations? Bring in the heavies. Have a zone-blocking set and a 3rd/4th and 1 set.

Not even sure if Benson could get the yards with this oline's tendency for finesse.

I actually wanted to find 2 fat boy guards for that reason. LOL. Liked Herman Johnson LSU.

TexansFanatic
10-13-2009, 11:05 AM
I was clearly for us bringing the guy in. I was very disappointed when we didn't even give him a sniff the FIRST time, when (as you said) we couldn't be bidding against anyone but ourselves.

This is easily one of the worst non-acquisitions that this franchise screwed up. I think it was a combination of McNair morality and ethics belief system, as well as Kubiak's arrogance that he already had all the RBs he needed. In fact, I would describe Kubiak's initial reaction--to the news that Benson "might" be trying out for the Texans--as being "Kubiak chortled" at the idea. As if Benson planted the information, and as if the Texans would rather suck the tailpipe of a running car than to allow him to try out.

Maybe this team needs five more olinemen on the roster who are big, huge fat guys who are used for short yardage situations? Bring in the heavies. Have a zone-blocking set and a 3rd/4th and 1 set.

Not even sure if Benson could get the yards with this oline's tendency for finesse.

Excellent post.

disaacks3
10-13-2009, 11:34 AM
With the alignment we ran on 4th down, our offensive line, and the ZBS scheme we tried to use on that play, I'm not sure that Barry Sanders in his prime would have been a "certain score". I don't blame the back, I blame the supporting cast & call. I'm not saying Benson wouldn't have helped on certain other plays, but our run offense has far deeper problems than Slaton / Brown.

ZBS - is NOT a power running game. If we want to do that, then you pattern your line like the Cowboys of the late 80's / early 90's and put 300 pounders in there.

With our offense, why you wouldn't run a spread alignment down close is beyond me.

Goldensilence
10-13-2009, 11:41 AM
I don't get how anyone here can say with a straight face that a Slaton, Brown, and Moats backfield is better than a Slaton, Benson and whomever makes the third slot.

I'm not jumping off the cliff some of you are in insinuating, Benson = fixed running game = championship.

I think Runner pointed it out perfectly. Just another example of a blown possible signing that could've given us depth at a spot. Dare I say could've made us a better team.

DerekLee1
10-13-2009, 11:47 AM
This is easily one of the worst non-acquisitions that this franchise screwed up. I think it was a combination of McNair morality and ethics belief system, as well as Kubiak's arrogance that he already had all the RBs he needed. In fact, I would describe Kubiak's initial reaction--to the news that Benson "might" be trying out for the Texans--as being "Kubiak chortled" at the idea. As if Benson planted the information, and as if the Texans would rather suck the tailpipe of a running car than to allow him to try out.

The Texans DID offer him a reasonable contract so I don't understand why so many people are complaining that they "passed" on him. He wanted more, Cincy was willing to pay more. Simple as that. We had a feature back that had outperformed Benson the previous season, so offering him any more than backup money would have been foolish. The Bengals didn't offer him MUCH more than the Texans if I recall correctly, but they needed him as their feature back, and he knew it. Hindsight is 20/20. It seems I recall even Kubiak said something to the effect of "it would have been nice to have had him here this season".

I'm happy for him that he's turned around his career. But don't think the Texans didn't try to get him here. They did.

Texecutioner
10-13-2009, 11:51 AM
I won't blame the coaching staff or management on this one. I was in the camp that didn't want Benson either. He never looked like a good player in Chicago and he kept getting in trouble and all of his team mates hated him in Chicago and talked about how lazy he was. I don't know what all went on when he was trying out for the Texans, but I was glad at the time that we didn't sign him last season. I was wrong about that obviously and so was management, but that wasn't an easy call. It's not like the Texans were the only organization that passed on Benson.

Now in this recent off season, we maybe should have given him a stronger look, but again there was the question of whether or not if he'd have ran hard after getting paid again. Oh well, it's over now. He's a Bengal and ripping it up.

Goldensilence
10-13-2009, 11:58 AM
I won't blame the coaching staff or management on this one. I was in the camp that didn't want Benson either. He never looked like a good player in Chicago and he kept getting in trouble and all of his team mates hated him in Chicago and talked about how lazy he was. I don't know what all went on when he was trying out for the Texans, but I was glad at the time that we didn't sign him last season. I was wrong about that obviously and so was management, but that wasn't an easy call. It's not like the Texans were the only organization that passed on Benson.

Now in this recent off season, we maybe should have given him a stronger look, but again there was the question of whether or not if he'd have ran hard after getting paid again. Oh well, it's over now. He's a Bengal and ripping it up.

Again on the first contract would it really have killed us? So what if he turned out to be lazy, worst case scenario we could've cut him after a few weeks.

Still don't get why anyone was opposed to a low cost, high reward contract that could've been given out the first go around. Unless some of you actually LIKE seeing Chris Brown "run".

Texecutioner
10-13-2009, 12:01 PM
Again on the first contract would it really have killed us? So what if he turned out to be lazy, worst case scenario we could've cut him after a few weeks.

Still don't get why anyone was opposed to a low cost, high reward contract that could've been given out the first go around. Unless some of you actually LIKE seeing Chris Brown "run".

Hey, I'm not saying it wasn't a huge mistake. It certainly was. Management screwed up on that big time. I'm just not going to criticize them for it on this particular issue, because I felt the same way they did at the time and didn't want them to sign Benson. Even though they were wrong, I can see why they didn't do it. Benson had those cases he had just caught and gotten off of them and all, but who knew if he wasn't going to catch another one? Plus, there wasn't any evidence that he was a good NFL player at the time either. He stunk it up in Chicago.

GP
10-13-2009, 12:07 PM
The Texans DID offer him a reasonable contract so I don't understand why so many people are complaining that they "passed" on him. He wanted more, Cincy was willing to pay more. Simple as that. We had a feature back that had outperformed Benson the previous season, so offering him any more than backup money would have been foolish. The Bengals didn't offer him MUCH more than the Texans if I recall correctly, but they needed him as their feature back, and he knew it. Hindsight is 20/20. It seems I recall even Kubiak said something to the effect of "it would have been nice to have had him here this season".

I'm happy for him that he's turned around his career. But don't think the Texans didn't try to get him here. They did.

No, Kubiak initially bristled at the mere idea that we would even try him out.

We probably could have signed him easily at the beginning. Then Cincy came into the picture, and we tried to sign him but the problem is now there was another suitor (Cincy) and we lost out.

The problem is that we had a player who made mention of us; but our team officials laughed it off. "We have all the RBs we need. We're happy with who we have. We wish Cedric the best."

IIRC, that was how it went down. The team who has Domanick Davis and Steve Slaton as their best RBs of all time turned down a guy who is leading in rushing yards right now. Oops.

There's a weird philosophy, by Kubiak, with RBs. Very helter skelter. We'll brig on Gado, Dayne, and a washed-up Ahman Green. Hell, we'll even take on Chris freaking Brown...but we pass on Cedric Benson. It really is puzzling.

ObsiWan
10-13-2009, 12:08 PM
I'd rather talk about how the Texans decided to pick up Carr's option instead of trying to sign Drew Brees. :)
While I agree with you, that's been done to death. But I understand your point.
This whole thread is so much whiny water over the dam. And as others have said, repeatedly, who knows what sort of success Benson would have here.
If any.

GP
10-13-2009, 12:11 PM
Hey, I'm not saying it wasn't a huge mistake. It certainly was. Management screwed up on that big time. I'm just not going to criticize them for it on this particular issue, because I felt the same way they did at the time and didn't want them to sign Benson. Even though they were wrong, I can see why they didn't do it. Benson had those cases he had just caught and gotten off of them and all, but who knew if he wasn't going to catch another one? Plus, there wasn't any evidence that he was a good NFL player at the time either. He stunk it up in Chicago.

Orton stunk it up in Chicago, too. Looking pretty good now.

Favre stunk it up in New York. Looking pretty good now.

These guys go through cycles of doing good, then sucking, then doing good again. Randy Moss is THE prime example of that.

Sometimes, there's no rhyme or reason as to how that cycle works.

But this team should have ran Cedric Benson right onto the practice field the day he had mentioned maybe playing here or being interested in us (or seeing the opportunity here, whatever it was that he had said).

I'm not saying this is THE defining characteristic of the Rick Smith and Gary Kubiak regime. The world keeps spinning, obviously enough, but it was a dropped ball IMO.

The front office failed to execute, as Dom would like to say.

JDizzle
10-13-2009, 12:12 PM
There's a weird philosophy, by Kubiak, with RBs. Very helter skelter. We'll brig on Gado, Dayne, and a washed-up Ahman Green. Hell, we'll even take on Chris freaking Brown...but we pass on Cedric Benson. It really is puzzling.

You must get all E's in the conduct section of your report card to be with the Texans, Benson isn't exactly a golden boy so there ya go, nothing new really.

Texecutioner
10-13-2009, 12:16 PM
Orton stunk it up in Chicago, too. Looking pretty good now.

Favre stunk it up in New York. Looking pretty good now.

These guys go through cycles of doing good, then sucking, then doing good again. Randy Moss is THE prime example of that.

Sometimes, there's no rhyme or reason as to how that cycle works.

But this team should have ran Cedric Benson right onto the practice field the day he had mentioned maybe playing here or being interested in us (or seeing the opportunity here, whatever it was that he had said).

I'm not saying this is THE defining characteristic of the Rick Smith and Gary Kubiak regime. The world keeps spinning, obviously enough, but it was a dropped ball IMO.

The front office failed to execute, as Dom would like to say.

Again, I'm not saying that they didn't make a mistake. THey obviously did. I just can't be the one criticizing them for it "in this case." I felt the same way the team did at the time, so that wouldn't be fair to criticize Kubes and Smith for it now. That would be hypocritical of me.

If you or anyone else though was really wanting him at the time and felt that he needed a chance to play here, well then I can see where you're coming from. I'd probably feel the same way that you do right now.

Blake
10-13-2009, 12:22 PM
If Benson could have come to Houston and had the same production that he is having in Cincy, then yes, it was a mistake not to sign him.

Are we done with this thread? Or should we bicker about a player that is not even on our roster for another 5 pages?

ObsiWan
10-13-2009, 12:24 PM
There's a weird philosophy, by Kubiak, with RBs. Very helter skelter. We'll brig on Gado, Dayne, and a washed-up Ahman Green. Hell, we'll even take on Chris freaking Brown...but we pass on Cedric Benson. It really is puzzling.

Not really. At the time Benson was in and out of trouble with the law and had a questionable work ethic. None of the guys you listed had those kinds of issues. We don't take guys who seem to have issues.
Seems consistent to me.

ObsiWan
10-13-2009, 12:25 PM
If Benson could have come to Houston and had the same production that he is having in Cincy, then yes, it was a mistake not to sign him.

Are we done with this thread? Or should we bicker about a player that is not even on our roster for another 5 pages?

:goodpost:
Rep for you

Marcus
10-13-2009, 12:31 PM
Again on the first contract would it really have killed us? So what if he turned out to be lazy, worst case scenario we could've cut him after a few weeks.

Still don't get why anyone was opposed to a low cost, high reward contract that could've been given out the first go around. Unless some of you actually LIKE seeing Chris Brown "run".

Because it's been explained that at the time, it didn't seem like a good idea. If we all had crystal balls, there's a lot of things that would have been done differently.

GP
10-13-2009, 12:33 PM
Again, I'm not saying that they didn't make a mistake. THey obviously did. I just can't be the one criticizing them for it "in this case." I felt the same way the team did at the time, so that wouldn't be fair to criticize Kubes and Smith for it now. That would be hypocritical of me.

If you or anyone else though was really wanting him at the time and felt that he needed a chance to play here, well then I can see where you're coming from. I'd probably feel the same way that you do right now.

I can't say that any of us here, whether we wanted him or not, could have predicted that he would have had this good of a year. Especially when he's with Cincy. I figured he would be average, at best. I figured he'd be rotated in and out while Cincy tries to find the guy who would carry the majority of the snaps.

The only thing that stings, for me, is that the guy was laughed off by Kubiak, who chortled at the mere notion of the idea (in interview remarks when first asked about Benson's interest). In fact, the direct quote, IIRC, when the reporter said there was a report that Benson would be trying out was "Really? That's news to me." then a little cocky giggle or snort at the end of his reply.

Gary, are you FOR REAL with that? To suggest that things are great at running back on this team, at that particular moment in time?

To me, this was Kubiak arrogance when it comes to he and Mike Shanahan's theory on RBs. They believe that THEY find the buried treasure. They believe that THEY possess the talent to scope out hot prospects that nobody else can identify. You don't come and tell Kubiak that you want to try out. If you don't get the phone call from Gary, you aren't good enough.

IMO, that's also playing out in our coaching staff. Gary wants to be the one who gets the glory for having picked up the coaches that he thinks will be great. He picked Kyle when obviously no other NFL team is going to give the guy THAT shot at his current age and experience level. He picked Bush because he didn't want an established presence as a d-coord.

Kubiak is a bit of narcissist in this area of finding and playing talent.

MannyFresh
10-13-2009, 12:36 PM
I can't say that any of us here, whether we wanted him or not, could have predicted that he would have had this good of a year. Especially when he's with Cincy. I figured he would be average, at best. I figured he'd be rotated in and out while Cincy tries to find the guy who would carry the majority of the snaps.

The only thing that stings, for me, is that the guy was laughed off by Kubiak, who chortled at the mere notion of the idea (in interview remarks when first asked about Benson's interest). In fact, the direct quote, IIRC, when the reporter said there was a report that Benson would be trying out was "Really? That's news to me." then a little cocky giggle or snort at the end of his reply.

Gary, are you FOR REAL with that? To suggest that things are great at running back on this team, at that particular moment in time?

To me, this was Kubiak arrogance when it comes to he and Shanahan's theory on RBs. They believe that THEY find the buried treasure. They beliebve that THEY possess the talent to scope out hot prospects that nobody else can identify. You don't come and tell Kubiak that you want to try uot. If you don't get the phone call from Gary, you aren't good enough.

IMO, that's also playing out in our coaching staff. Gary wants to be the one who gets the glory for having picked up the coaches that he thinks will be great. He picked Kyle when obviously no other NFL team is going to give the guy THAT shot at his current age and experience level. He picked Bush because he didn't want an established presence as a d-coord.

Kubiak is a bit of narcissist in this area of finding and playing talent.



Here! Here!, I hope Kubiak reads this!

GP
10-13-2009, 12:44 PM
Not really. At the time Benson was in and out of trouble with the law and had a questionable work ethic. None of the guys you listed had those kinds of issues. We don't take guys who seem to have issues.
Seems consistent to me.

And his level of "issues" are not the same issues you get with Vick.

Even Ray Lewis had his legal problems glossed over, for crying out loud.

This is proof that this team is more about looking good...rather than playing to win. The issues he had were not earth shattering. And he had said that he was doing better and was learning more about life from his errors.

I'm not saying "Let's take on the bad apples of the NFL," but the line that was seemingly drawn on Cedric was absurd IMO.

We've got too much of a "steady as she goes" (glacial change) pace going on in this organization. We're riding an electric scooter because it's fashionable to do so, while cars are passing us on the freeway and honking at us to move over and give them some room to operate.

James Casey isn't going to sniff any REAL snaps this year. Jacoby Jones has scored points as a returner, and has made big plays at WR in the very limited action that he has seen. And where was he last weekend? Unless I missed something, he was absent from the gameplan on offense. They keep trying to pretend that Chris Brown is going to make this team and be an integral part of the run game.

It's actually amazing that we've been able to stay afloat and tread water for this long, with the half-brained ideology of this team's leaders and decision-makers.

Marcus
10-13-2009, 12:44 PM
GP, I don't get it. In an earlier post, you said it would be hypocritical of you to criticize them for not signing Benson. But now, you've just basically criticized him for the same thing.

:um:

Goldensilence
10-13-2009, 12:49 PM
Because it's been explained that at the time, it didn't seem like a good idea. If we all had crystal balls, there's a lot of things that would have been done differently.

There's no crystal ball needed. We had no problem throwing money at Chris Brown who career numbers, with the exception of the 2004 season, are worse then Benson's.

Reality is it was an image issue.

GP
10-13-2009, 12:50 PM
GP, I don't get it. In an earlier post, you said it would be hypocritical of you to criticize them for not signing Benson. But now, you've just basically criticized him for the same thing.

:um:

Signing and trying out are two different things.

All I wanted is for this team to say "You know what? We're always looking for people who WANT TO BE HERE."

Scoffing at the idea was not smart, IMO.

Try him out. That's all.

If he looks good, give him a shot.

But signing him wasn't even on the radar. Hell, trying him OUT wasn't even on the radar.

Unless I missed something, Kubiak's "boys" aren't to the point where you turn away players who can help. At a position of great need, by the way.

We don't need a crystal ball. What we need is a good, long look at every available person who's out there that might come in and do well if we give them a chance.

I'm not mad at not signing him. I'm mad at not trying him out at all.

DerekLee1
10-13-2009, 12:56 PM
The only thing that stings, for me, is that the guy was laughed off by Kubiak, who chortled at the mere notion of the idea (in interview remarks when first asked about Benson's interest). In fact, the direct quote, IIRC, when the reporter said there was a report that Benson would be trying out was "Really? That's news to me." then a little cocky giggle or snort at the end of his reply.

Gary, are you FOR REAL with that? To suggest that things are great at running back on this team, at that particular moment in time?

Are you REALLY going to sit and nitpick about every little comment? That's a bit Michael Moore of you.

In context, the laugh was because the Texans HADN'T yet scheduled a tryout with Benson, and as head coach, he'd be the one to BE there for that tryout. And it was funny at the time IN CONTEXT. He wasn't laughing off Benson or being cocky about his RB's. He was laughing at the press for "reporting" Kubiak's doings when they hadn't been done.

silvrhand
10-13-2009, 01:51 PM
Does it really matter what we could/should/would have done if we got/traded/drafted xxx/yyy/zzz player? It matters who/what we have now and how effective we are at getting the most out of them.

Benson probably would have been less successful here simply cause our ZBS isn't working this year. Would he be bad as Slaton, IDK, nor do I care cause it's pointless to speculate.

GP
10-13-2009, 02:27 PM
Are you REALLY going to sit and nitpick about every little comment? That's a bit Michael Moore of you.

In context, the laugh was because the Texans HADN'T yet scheduled a tryout with Benson, and as head coach, he'd be the one to BE there for that tryout. And it was funny at the time IN CONTEXT. He wasn't laughing off Benson or being cocky about his RB's. He was laughing at the press for "reporting" Kubiak's doings when they hadn't been done.

Says he who started a "I'm drinking the Kool Aid" thread.

There's all manner of ways to respond to a rumor that someone is or isn't trying out for your team. From my standpoint, Kubiak was laughing off the idea (not merely trying to squash a rumor). The guy has ZERO public relations skills, obviously.

In fact, I think he took it as an insult that Benson thought he could fit into this team with how much "opportunity there is" on the roster.

In short:

CB: "I'm Cedric Benson, and I think I can help out this team's poor running back situation."

GK: "Oh really? We're fine the way we are, thankyouverymuch."

I realize I am splitting hairs, but this is a ridiculous conversation that I have foolishly chosen to enter. Looks like hindsight is 20/20 for trying out RBs AND for entering stupid threads.

I thought I was just putting out another train of thought. I guess there is only two train stations on this set of train tracks: We could NEVER have foreseen that Benson would do so well, and it was a disaster to not sign the guy.

I thought there might be a third station that some people might want to be at: Why not just try the guy out? Who cares if we sign or don't sign after the tryout. But to laugh at it, then come back with an offer that can't even beat the bengals? LOL.

Benson ended up winning, and we lost out. Had we tried him out, when he planted the info that he could see himself here, we could have dealt with it better.

Just sayin' that I think it was misplayed from the beginning.

GP
10-13-2009, 02:28 PM
Does it really matter what we could/should/would have done if we got/traded/drafted xxx/yyy/zzz player? It matters who/what we have now and how effective we are at getting the most out of them.

Benson probably would have been less successful here simply cause our ZBS isn't working this year. Would he be bad as Slaton, IDK, nor do I care cause it's pointless to speculate.

I'm with you.

Where am I, and how did I get here?

LOL.

ubecool454
10-13-2009, 02:32 PM
Some of us called it a mistake then. Just sayin'....

I'm not one of us because its just a matter of time before Benson hits the wall. He is a decent RB but I think we are just fine with the RBs that we have.

GP
10-13-2009, 02:35 PM
I'm not one of us because its just a matter of time before Benson hits the wall. He is a decent RB but I think we are just fine with the RBs that we have.

These things are cyclical. If the Patriots don't turn things around, Randy Moss is going to go AWOL again...and become a nuisance once again.

Benson is one of those guys that might give you a good season one year, then fart around the next season, then get traded and do well in the new place, rinse and repeat.

But I'd gladly take what he's doing in Cincy so far this year. It might have made a difference in the games we've played so far.