Jerry Angelo's draft picks (bad)

[Da Bears 88]

Yes, Benson is a bust... yeah, um, BULLSHIT!

You're a Benson homer. Get a clue, man.

[nfoligno]

1) I don't think Adrian Peterson had too much problem accellerating on the slow surface in Chicago. I've also noticed that Devin Hester seems to be pretty fast in Chicago. In other words, that logic is faulty. Sure, it's great to have that bruiser in the one or two games a year when Soldier field gets messy, if it even happens, but it's probably better to have a guy like Devin Hester who has the potential to change a game on every play. Aside from Jamal Lewis, Lendale White, and maybe one other, the top 15 RBs in the league, statistically by yardage, are all faster, quick-hitter-types.

 

You misunderstand my point. I like homerun hitters too, but my point is that you do not have to be AP/Bush style runner in order to be a franchise RB. I would also point out that Benson has shown ability to hit the big runs. Heck, he breaks off a 60 yarder for a score, and after a couple more good carries, is benched.

 

2) In all honesty, I wouldn't mind a plodding, blasting, Earl Campbell franchise back. If the guy can keep the chains moving with constant four and five yarders, causing the safeties to creep up and allow the passing game holes, I'm all for it. But usually the guy who does that in college doesn't do that in the pros. That's why the quick-hitters are typically better pro RBs.

 

I simply think Benson (a) was considered a far more quick hitter than what we have seen and ( still can get that form back.

 

This is something I think is key. You have seen Benson, which makes it all too easy to forget, but Benson was not considered a plodder in college. No, there wasn't any mistaking him for AP, but he was not considered slow, or fast "for a power back". He was a 220lb RB that showed solid burst to the hole, exceleration through it, and solid speed in the 2nd level. Coming out of college, he was considered a lot quicker than you are making out.

 

3) Like I said before, I agree with you. If a team thinks they have a franchise guy on the board, and he is a can't miss, sometimes you gotta go BPA. If you know Peyton Manning is going to turn into Peyton Manning, and you happen to have a Carson Palmer, you might just have to draft Manning and find a trade-partner for Palmer, despite the fact that he is great in his own right. I just didn't think Benson was that guy. And from what I remember about all the debates back then, most thought he was good, but not as special as the Bears' staff apparently thought. As you said, it appears that those of us who thought Benson was a wasted pick are right. With that said, I hope he proves me wrong next year.

 

While I recall opinions on the board being mixed, I do not recall the scouting community being very mixed. Most every scouting report I recall had Benson as a top 5 pick, both in likely draft spot and quality.

[balta1701-A]

You misunderstand my point. I like homerun hitters too, but my point is that you do not have to be AP/Bush style runner in order to be a franchise RB. I would also point out that Benson has shown ability to hit the big runs. Heck, he breaks off a 60 yarder for a score, and after a couple more good carries, is benched.

This is the 2nd post in this thread where people have seemed to use Reggie Bush as a positive example. Right now, there are 41 running backs considered qualified for the rushing stat lists (averaging 6.25+ attempts per game). Reggie Bush is 39th out of 41 guys (Benson is not on that list presumably due to injury) in yards per attempt, beating only Lendale White and Thomas Jones. Bush has also fumbled 7 times this year. Reggie Bush has put up a terrible season as a running back, and right now, given his draft hype, isn't looking all that much better than Benson in terms of living up to the promise.

[nfoligno]

I think you are missing the original point.

 

When NO drafted Bush, what was the general public opinion? As I recall, most felt NO made a GREAT move, while Houston screwed the pooch passing on him. NO at the time had a very good RB in Deuce McAlister, yet choose to draft Buch regardless. Few thought it was a bad move. Similar, Minny had a RB coming off a very successful season (Chester the molester) and yet drafted AP. Few thought this was a bad move.

 

We had TJ, and drafted Benson. We did it then because we felt Benson was a franchise back, while TJ was not. Argue the scouting, but the point is, even if you have a good player at a position, if you feel you have the potential to draft a franchise player, you do it.

 

Whether Bush is a bust or a boom is not the point in this discussion. The point was more a matter of public opinion. Few argued the pick of Bush, even though NO already had McAlister. For the record, I was among the few.

[Da Bears 88]

nfoligno,

 

Benson's longest run was a 40+ yard TD run.

 

He only averaged 61.3 yards a game.

 

Kind of hard to break off a 60 yard run, when he has never done it.

[jackie hayes]

I think you are missing the original point.

 

When NO drafted Bush, what was the general public opinion? As I recall, most felt NO made a GREAT move, while Houston screwed the pooch passing on him. NO at the time had a very good RB in Deuce McAlister, yet choose to draft Buch regardless. Few thought it was a bad move. Similar, Minny had a RB coming off a very successful season (Chester the molester) and yet drafted AP. Few thought this was a bad move.

 

We had TJ, and drafted Benson. We did it then because we felt Benson was a franchise back, while TJ was not. Argue the scouting, but the point is, even if you have a good player at a position, if you feel you have the potential to draft a franchise player, you do it.

 

Whether Bush is a bust or a boom is not the point in this discussion. The point was more a matter of public opinion. Few argued the pick of Bush, even though NO already had McAlister. For the record, I was among the few.

I agree with your point, but I don't know if Bush is a great example. Deuce was coming off an injury and his production had dropped sharply. Beyond that, Bush was thought to be a once-every-five-years-or-so type of talent. Benson was very highly regarded, but he wasn't a can't-pass sort of player. (McFadden is closer.)

 

Teams certainly have taken heat for choosing backs when they have a good starter -- when Cinci took Perry, when KC took Johnson. And those two are proof that the results can go either way.

 

Edit: One other thing with Bush is that it's pretty easy to have both Bush and McAllister on the field together, with Bush split out. That doesn't work as well with Jones and Benson. Jones is a good receiver for a back, no doubt, but he's not a '/wr' type.