PDA

View Full Version : Ced Benson or Troy Williamson


jacquescas
04-14-2005, 01:01 PM
if they both fall to us, where do you stand?


I think i'd have to go with benson, he will provide more insurance for DD and with bradford back our WR can stand to develop someone in the later rounds.

O.G.
04-14-2005, 01:26 PM
I would have to go with Ced Benson, Troy Williamson, although the fastest receiver in the draft was in a pass happy offense. Could turn out to be another Corey Bradford. Just my opininon

infantrycak
04-14-2005, 01:29 PM
Williamson played in a run oriented offense, not a pass happy offense.

hound
04-14-2005, 01:33 PM
if they both fall to us, where do you stand?


I think i'd have to go with benson, he will provide more insurance for DD and with bradford back our WR can stand to develop someone in the later rounds.

I don't think he'd provide insurance for DD. I think he would just take his job. And then DD would be insurance for Benson. I'd probably go with Benson. Troy has great straight ahead speed but isn't very quick with his cuts. He's a long strider that has great straight ahead speed.

I like Mark Clayton better than TW because of Clayton's quickness.

Blake
04-14-2005, 01:36 PM
Keary Colbert anyone? Just take WR in the 2nd or 3rd round.

O.G.
04-14-2005, 01:54 PM
Williamson played in a run oriented offense, not a pass happy offense.

My bad, meant to say wasn't in a pass happy offense

royce1054
04-14-2005, 01:54 PM
i am starting to think that getting the outside pash (OLB) rush with the 1st pick is a good way to go but i do think we should trade down for that pick. Use the picks we get to get the WR and depth at the other positions.

canadiantexan
04-14-2005, 02:10 PM
If I had to choose between the two I think Williamson is a bigger upgrade over Bradford than Benson is over DD. So I'd take Williamson even though I would like to trade for more picks and take D in the first and someone like Matt Jones if he's there in the 2nd.

Wild Bill
04-14-2005, 02:36 PM
I definately like Mark Clayton better than Williamson. I think he will be the next Marvin Harrison. He is smooth, always gets open, and has great hands. I think Williamson will be a bust. He doesn't catch the ball very well and runs poor routes (ala Cory Bradford).

My question is, would you take Benson over Clayton? With our zone blocking scheme which requires the running back to pick his lane, make one cut, then go, I think Benson would be great. However, it's easier to find good running backs than it is wide receivers like Clayton.

Both areas need to be addressed. While DD is a great back, I think he will always have problems staying healthy.

Vinny
04-14-2005, 02:43 PM
Williamson tore up the WR skills competition. He beat out Clayton and Edwards to win it and some say he dominated the event like nobody else since Javon Walker. Here is a nice vid with Williamson's catches. http://www.pmvfx.com/video/DEC-sports/T_williamson.wmv

I'd be happy with Ced Benson or Williamson.

canadiantexan
04-14-2005, 02:44 PM
I definately like Mark Clayton better than Williamson. I think he will be the next Marvin Harrison. He is smooth, always gets open, and has great hands. I think Williamson will be a bust. He doesn't catch the ball very well and runs poor routes (ala Cory Bradford).

My question is, would you take Benson over Clayton? With our zone blocking scheme which requires the running back to pick his lane, make one cut, then go, I think Benson would be great. However, it's easier to find good running backs than it is wide receivers like Clayton.

Both areas need to be addressed. While DD is a great back, I think he will always have problems staying healthy.

Again I think Clayton is more of a upgrade over Bradford than Ced over DD.
Although I'd love to have Ced on our team but I'm just not a Bradford fan.

Wild Bill
04-14-2005, 02:50 PM
I think that if we DONT take a receiver with our first pick, that Bradford is going to have a heck of a time beating out Starling. Clearly the Texans signed him for depth.

The combine and skills competition is so overated. How many guys go in there and tear up the workouts, but never produce in games? I don't doubt that Williamson is fast and had a great workout, but Edwards and Clayton proved it during games throughout their careers. I also recognize that Williamson didn't have a great system or qb to play with during his college career.

This all leads to the biggest mystery of all: Who will be good NFL players, and who will be busts? The safe pick, if Clayton, Williamson, and Benson are available at 13 is IMO Clayton and Benson. Williamson has the potential, but never was able to do it in college.

Vinny
04-14-2005, 02:59 PM
Williamson has the potential, but never was able to do it in college.What is "it"? He was in a College running offense. Of course he didn't produce like Clayton did. Clayton had a legit QB.

Williamson played in every game, starting five contests as a true freshman. He caught 17 passes for 491 yards (28.9 avg.) and four touchdowns while adding 47 yards on three carries (15.7 avg.) and 74 yards on three kickoff returns (24.7 avg.). In 2003, Williamson started 10 games at split end. He hauled in 31 passes for 428 yards (13.8 avg.) and two touchdowns, including a school- and Southeastern Conference-record 99-yarder. He also handled the bulk of the team's kickoff return duties, gaining 268 yards on 14 attempts (19.1 avg.).

As a junior, Williamson accounted for a career-high 835 yards on 43 receptions with seven touchdowns. He also had seven kickoff returns for 105 yards (15.0 avg.) and 30 yards on four carries (7.5 avg.). He closed out his career with 91 receptions for 1,754 yards (19.3 avg.) and 13 touchdowns in 34 games. His 1,754 yards rank seventh on the school's all-time record list. Williamson also gained 101 yards on 12 carries (8.4 avg.), 447 yards on 24 kickoff returns (18.6 avg.) and recorded four solo tackles on special teams. http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2005/williamson_troy

dalemurphy
04-14-2005, 03:06 PM
Not Benson, Please!!!!

Wild Bill
04-14-2005, 03:10 PM
The 'it' is the big catches that you saw consistantly from Edwards and Clayton. The 'it' is the reputation through performance of being a gamebreaker.

I know the reason why is because of the sucky team he was on and the inability to get him the football down field.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that Williamson will not be a good or even great NFL player, I'm just saying that there are a lot of questions because he couldn't do it in college or various reasons.

These guys coming out of college are such a great unknown on how they will do in the NFL game. Ryan Leaf was awesome in college but couldn't adjust to the speed of the NFL and the pressures associated with it. This can happen to any of these guys. That's why we go to chatrooms to voice our opinions and NFL coaches get paid millions to make the decisions. I just hope that whatever we do, we get an impact player that will be great for the Texans franchise for years to come.

TheOgre
04-14-2005, 03:17 PM
While I think WR is currently one of our biggest weak areas, I consider RB the focal point of our offense. Benson would be the type of back I envision for Caper's offense.

If we drafted Benson AND Hollings finally showed something, we might be able to trade DD for a nice pick (low 2nd rounder?) or a quality pick.

Porky
04-14-2005, 03:44 PM
I am for anyone who can help this team win, and all three can do that. But, it seems to me that Williamson and Benson really fit the Texans scheme, and style of offense, more than Clayton. I think that Williamson is alot like Bradford, only a hundred times better. That's what I believe they want - a fast as all get out guy, tall, rangy and athletic, who can stretch defenses. Benson is a Stephen Davis type who can also help tremendousely. Either would help alot, and I would be happy with either.....BUT, I still think we are more likely to go defense than offense, and their are a number of ways we can go on that side of the ball too. All I know is I am less certain of our #1 pick than at any point since the start of this franchise.

D-ReK
04-14-2005, 03:50 PM
I don't get why everyone is so big on Troy Williamson...Wow, he runs fast...He also runs sloppy routes and has average hands at best...I think our 13th overall pick could be better used, but the owner supposedly has a bias towards players from his alma mater, so we may have to get used to having two Bradfords on the team...

Personally, I would take Benson since he has the ability to pound and weaken a team's front 7, causing the secondary to creep up, allowing us to burn them on play-action...With him pounding and DD slashing, I think we would have one of the best rushing attacks in the NFL a la Atlanta with Dunn and Duckett...

outofhnd
04-15-2005, 12:08 AM
Why did Williamson sign on with a College Campus with Lou Holtz? Did he not know he loves the option? Atleast we know he is a decent downfield blocker.

If I had to take one of the 2 I would take Benson.

1. This is a contract year for DD this will be motivation for him to break out and be a franchise back, or pack his bags. Bradford Was a one year cheap signing and may not even be back on the team depending on the other receivers we have do.

2. Benson would not only be an upgrade it would solidify the backfield, he is the type of runner capers covets. a Downhill runner with a knack for finding the endzone and could contribute bigtime immediately. Williamson would prolly need atleast a year maybe 2 before he has a firm grasp of the offense.

3. What is the point of getting a WR if our line ends up as bad as last year? Carr won't have time to check down to him.

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
04-15-2005, 12:20 AM
Cedric Benson

Grid
04-15-2005, 01:57 AM
A week ago I would have immediatly answered Benson.

But lately ive read some stuff on him that has me worried. Basicly.. his motivation is questionable.. and he is being compared to Ricky Williams. A ricky williams clone with the same questionable motivation? How long would he stay with us before he flew the coup and became a spiritual healer?

I still think Benson could be a great pickup.. but im not quite so sure that he would be better than Williamson anymore.

I think OLB with our first would be best though...personally.