jason Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 This video is near proof that the Bears need to draft OL in the first round, and maybe several others. When Cedric Benson is given a chance to build up steam, he's shown glimpses of dominating running. He's shown a little wiggle, a good deal of power, and an ability to see the whole/cutback lane. The Bears simply have to draft OL first, and all this Mendenhall talk is just plain crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 This video is near proof that the Bears need to draft OL in the first round, and maybe several others. When Cedric Benson is given a chance to build up steam, he's shown glimpses of dominating running. He's shown a little wiggle, a good deal of power, and an ability to see the whole/cutback lane. The Bears simply have to draft OL first, and all this Mendenhall talk is just plain crazy. lol Again why are you putting logical facts and now video evidence on this board? According to 80% of the people who post here, Benson can't break tackles, has no speed, has no talent, has no vision, can't cut back, can't outrun anybody, has no heart, doesn't work out ever, and generally is the biggest POS back we've ever had. O-line has nothing to do with it. But seriously, I hope everybody noticed what happens when that guy gets some blocks. Weird, he looks pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butkus Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I am not sure that the runs on that video clip are entirely representative of Cedric's recent running for the Bears, but I would say that he has not been given quite enough time to establish himself here yet. However, he has not helped himself with his off field demanour and behaviour either... Remember the last time we had two running backs, both of whom wanted to start? I hope we do not pick a running back high in the draft.....let's go with who we have and focus on OL and other areas of need.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted March 30, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I am not sure that the runs on that video clip are entirely representative of Cedric's recent running for the Bears, but I would say that he has not been given quite enough time to establish himself here yet. However, he has not helped himself with his off field demanour and behaviour either... Remember the last time we had two running backs, both of whom wanted to start? I hope we do not pick a running back high in the draft.....let's go with who we have and focus on OL and other areas of need.... Very good point. Having two running backs who want to be "the man", and both having something to prove (CB and a rook both have something to prove), there is almost a guarantee that the Bears lose in the situation. If Benson wins out, the rookie is shelved and the first round selection is a waste. IF the rookie wins out, the Benson is a bust. I'm probably the biggest Benson hater on this board since I've been against him from the draft; however, I know that drafting another RB is not the answer. Fixing the OL is the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 My biggest concern is how he will be after his surgery. He had all the talent in the world before the surgery, but having a plate in ankle can't be good for a RB. From Rotoworld: It has been suspected that Benson's rehabilitation from a fractured left ankle is not going smoothly, in which case he could be phased out of the team's plans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 well, it's still not official about him "losing a step" and it has just been a bunch of rumors basically... it hasn't been confirmed, but then again it hasn't been denied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iguana Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I think a burner like Chris Johnson or Jamaal Charles would compliment him nicely with a solid OL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I think a burner like Chris Johnson or Jamaal Charles would compliment him nicely with a solid OL. eh, we already have a guy who can't run inside the tackles but can catch in Wolfe. That's pretty much what Johnson is, except more athletic, bigger, and better. Jamaal Charles, maybe, but he can't block and doesn't know how to hold onto the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 Wow, I didn't know Benson averaged 10+ yards per carry last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 This video is near proof that the Bears need to draft OL in the first round, and maybe several others. When Cedric Benson is given a chance to build up steam, he's shown glimpses of dominating running. He's shown a little wiggle, a good deal of power, and an ability to see the whole/cutback lane. The Bears simply have to draft OL first, and all this Mendenhall talk is just plain crazy. Well presented jason. You are preaching to the chior here. I would like to see us pick up an RB AFTER getting OL as Benson's latest injury may necesitate another RB in the mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butkus Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 Let's stick with the RB's that we have, Benson, Peterson, and Wolfe. RB's are plentiful if we need to pick up an emergent need.... In the draft, I hope we focus on OL, perhaps safety/secondary and receiver if there are some nice opportunities available. If there is a great RB available in the later rounds, ok then....but one of our RB's will have to go most likely, and who will it be? I don't see a need to get rid of anyone we have at the moment, and Benson's contract makes it implausible to get rid of him. That being said, if Benson did not have the contract that he did, I would say to cut him and find someone else. However, his contract makes him the guy we need to keep for at least one more year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TerraTor Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 this fuckrag has been hurt every season since we drafted him. I think with his latest injury which im assuming will require some titanium, hes done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 this fuckrag has been hurt every season since we drafted him. I think with his latest injury which im assuming will require some titanium, hes done. Way to make your point Mr. Cursewords. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I've always thought Ced was better then he showed this past year due to the horrible play of the OL, however, I just think Mendenhall may be too big of a stud for JA to pass on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenom283 Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 I've always thought Ced was better then he showed this past year due to the horrible play of the OL, however, I just think Mendenhall may be too big of a stud for JA to pass on. If Chris Williams is off the board Ced is going to be riding the bench because theres no way we are gonna pass on Mendenhall he is just a beast we need to sign Olivea and trade up with the 2nd and 3rd and get Baker or Albert. So we can still draft Mendenhall at 14. But thats just my wish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 That's pretty much what Johnson is, except more athletic, bigger, and better. Then he obviously ISN'T like Wolfe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 Then he obviously ISN'T like Wolfe. They're the same type of player though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iguana Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 eh, we already have a guy who can't run inside the tackles but can catch in Wolfe. That's pretty much what Johnson is, except more athletic, bigger, and better. Jamaal Charles, maybe, but he can't block and doesn't know how to hold onto the ball. Charles is LESS physical than Johnson. From what I've seen Johnson can run inside. despite his size, he runs with power and is not afraid of contact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 I really dont think going into the season expecting anything from Wolfe is a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 I hear ya... If Chris Williams is off the board Ced is going to be riding the bench because theres no way we are gonna pass on Mendenhall he is just a beast we need to sign Olivea and trade up with the 2nd and 3rd and get Baker or Albert. So we can still draft Mendenhall at 14. But thats just my wish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 Then call me crazy... Those are nice runs by Benson for sure. However, we all must admit that it's an even nicer editing job. No fumbles there, or runs straight into a defender and falling down... I fully understand the need for a good OL. As I've mentioned with nfo (probably too many times for everyone else's liking...), I just think Mendenhall is a top ten prospect that is right now slotted at 14 by the so-called experts. I think taking him is a steal if he lands to us. I still don't think he will, because I imagine I'm not the only one seeing his potential. I'm more than OK drafting an OL. Even in lieu of Mendenhall. I just think it would be foolish to pass him up. It wouldn't be the first time the BEars did something against my wishes, nor would it be the first time I was wrong about a prospect. But something tell me if we don't get Mendenhall if he's available to us at 14, we will severely regret it. This video is near proof that the Bears need to draft OL in the first round, and maybe several others. When Cedric Benson is given a chance to build up steam, he's shown glimpses of dominating running. He's shown a little wiggle, a good deal of power, and an ability to see the whole/cutback lane. The Bears simply have to draft OL first, and all this Mendenhall talk is just plain crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Then call me crazy... Those are nice runs by Benson for sure. However, we all must admit that it's an even nicer editing job. No fumbles there, or runs straight into a defender and falling down... I fully understand the need for a good OL. As I've mentioned with nfo (probably too many times for everyone else's liking...), I just think Mendenhall is a top ten prospect that is right now slotted at 14 by the so-called experts. I think taking him is a steal if he lands to us. I still don't think he will, because I imagine I'm not the only one seeing his potential. I'm more than OK drafting an OL. Even in lieu of Mendenhall. I just think it would be foolish to pass him up. It wouldn't be the first time the BEars did something against my wishes, nor would it be the first time I was wrong about a prospect. But something tell me if we don't get Mendenhall if he's available to us at 14, we will severely regret it. Yep...crazy. I have seen Mendenhall play several times, and I just don't understand how anyone thinks he's a top ten back, and a can't lose prospect. He's good, and will be an average pro at best, but if the Bears pass up on an OL prospect for him, then I think it's a horrible decision (especially since the Bears have 3 RBs). You feel we'll regret passing him, but I'm nearly positive that if the Bears select him, we'll have deja vu in about two years in pre-draft discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Then we just agree to disagree. Yep...crazy. I have seen Mendenhall play several times, and I just don't understand how anyone thinks he's a top ten back, and a can't lose prospect. He's good, and will be an average pro at best, but if the Bears pass up on an OL prospect for him, then I think it's a horrible decision (especially since the Bears have 3 RBs). You feel we'll regret passing him, but I'm nearly positive that if the Bears select him, we'll have deja vu in about two years in pre-draft discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Questions regarding Mendenhal. Madman, I have some questions for you about Mendy. This is not a trap or trick. W/ the exception of about one quarter of the Ohio State game, i am not sure I saw Mendy play at all. So I just do not know much about him, and have some questions. 1. He has 3 seasons w/ Illinois, and only this year took over as the starter. I can understand low totals year one, but why was he not able to establish himself a year earlier. Did the team have a stud already? 2. I noticed Illinois' QB (Juice) had a ton of carries for big yards as well. How much of an effect did a QB like this have? Take a look at Atlanta, for example. A year ago, when they had Vick, I think Atlanta had the top rushing offense in the NFL. A big reason for this was not because Dunn or Norwood were studs, but because a mobile QB like Vick creates great opportunities for the RB since defense can't cheat too much for fear of the QB taking off. 3. OL? How good/great was their OL? Often when you have a RB and QB that can run the ball so well, it points to a very good OL. Was he running through gaping holes, or did he more often have to fight for openings? I realize through a season he would deal w/ both, but which was more likely more often? 4. Competition. I do not claim to be a college football expert, but the only team I noticed on their schedule that I would think of as a good defensive team was Ohio State, which also happened to be his worst game of the year (26-88-0, 3.4 ypc). Anyway, just a couple questions I think valid, especially since, if we did draft him, he would be playing on a poor offense, w/ a poor OL, and there would be no concern for the defense as to where the QB will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 nfo, I added my responses in blue. You bring up some completely legitimate concerns. I would take Mendenhall, but only if the OL come off the board too quick and there is only a reach at 14 with Mendenhall available. Questions regarding Mendenhal. Madman, I have some questions for you about Mendy. This is not a trap or trick. W/ the exception of about one quarter of the Ohio State game, i am not sure I saw Mendy play at all. So I just do not know much about him, and have some questions. 1. He has 3 seasons w/ Illinois, and only this year took over as the starter. I can understand low totals year one, but why was he not able to establish himself a year earlier. Did the team have a stud already? In 2006 and 2005, Mendenhall split carries with Pierre Thomas who was the starter. Also remember that Illinois only won 4 games in those 2 seasons, so Mendy did not get as many opportunities as he should have (playing from behind). In 2006, he had 8.2 YPC on 78 attempts. Once he was the main guy (2007), he truly shined. 2. I noticed Illinois' QB (Juice) had a ton of carries for big yards as well. How much of an effect did a QB like this have? Take a look at Atlanta, for example. A year ago, when they had Vick, I think Atlanta had the top rushing offense in the NFL. A big reason for this was not because Dunn or Norwood were studs, but because a mobile QB like Vick creates great opportunities for the RB since defense can't cheat too much for fear of the QB taking off. That is a great point. I am sure some of his yards were generated by the style of offense and ability of the QB. However, Illinois had a limited passing game, so teams stacked the box with 9 and 10 defenders to stop Juice and Mendy from running. So in this case it might have worked against Mendenhall. 3. OL? How good/great was their OL? Often when you have a RB and QB that can run the ball so well, it points to a very good OL. Was he running through gaping holes, or did he more often have to fight for openings? I realize through a season he would deal w/ both, but which was more likely more often? The O-Line was definitely improved in 2007. They had 2 players make the All-Conference teams. He definitely had both types of opportunities. One key stat here, he had at least a 10 yard run in every game in 2007 with his shortest long run being 13 yards. He also had several carries of 20 yards or longer, which indicates that he has the ability to get into the secondary. 4. Competition. I do not claim to be a college football expert, but the only team I noticed on their schedule that I would think of as a good defensive team was Ohio State, which also happened to be his worst game of the year (26-88-0, 3.4 ypc). He had 17-155-1, 9.1 YPC, and 5 rec for 59 yards vs USC in the Rose Bowl, but you are right, the competition wasn't the best. However, other solid Big Ten backs struggled against Ohio St (Mike Hart 18-44-0, 2.4). Also, in that same game vs Ohio St, Wells from Ohio St only ran for 20-76 against Ill. So it is hard to pick and choose specific games. Anyway, just a couple questions I think valid, especially since, if we did draft him, he would be playing on a poor offense, w/ a poor OL, and there would be no concern for the defense as to where the QB will be. Great questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.