Cedric Benson Is Not a "Sell High" (1 Viewer)

[DevilintheDetail]

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2012/12bloom_buysell_wk3.php

In this week's edition of Bloom's "Buy Low / Sell High" article, he identifies Cedric Benson as a sell high candidate. I won't copy the excerpt, but basically he argues that Benson had a nice game but primarily because James Stark will start stealing his carries when healthy, he will only give sporadic flex-level play this season.

This makes no sense to me for a couple of reasons. First off, Benson has a high usage rate for a contemporary RB, getting 24 carries in Week 2 (going for 115 yards against the Bears defense). The Packers are very clearly more committed to the run this year and Benson should have a lot of room to run with the multiple receiving options spreading the field. Green Bay doesn't have a big, bruising goal line back, so Benson should presumably get some of the many goal line touches that Green Bay will have to divvy up (I think they probably would like to limit Aaron Rodgers' exposure to injury at the goal line, too). Starks is a mediocre back that has been prone to getting nagging injuries. There has been no talk in Green Bay (that I'm aware of) of Benson losing carries to Starks. Further, though this week's matchup against the Seahawks is a tough one, the Packers still play a bunch of weak defenses in the meat of the season. It's easy to imagine Benson pounding defenses while the Packers protect big leads in November and December. I could easily see regular RB2 numbers with some big 100 yard / 2 TD, RB1-type games.

If anything, Benson seems to me like a clear buy low. Am I missing something?

 

[SameSongNDance]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

 

[DevilintheDetail]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

I watched the game. Why "could you tell that it was an aberration as a whole"? Serious question, really. I've read a lot of quotes before and after the game from GB coaches and players about wanting to run a lot more and have more offensive balance. Basically, exactly what happened in the game. Why would that be an aberration? I mean, even in the first quarter they ran a sequence of four or five plays in a row where Benson got either a carry or catch. At that stage in the game, it certainly looks like that was by design.

 

[SameSongNDance]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

I watched the game. Why "could you tell that it was an aberration as a whole"? Serious question, really. I've read a lot of quotes before and after the game from GB coaches and players about wanting to run a lot more and have more offensive balance. Basically, exactly what happened in the game. Why would that be an aberration? I mean, even in the first quarter they ran a sequence of four or five plays in a row where Benson got either a carry or catch. At that stage in the game, it certainly looks like that was by design.

The whole entire GB offense looked out of sync. Jennings was out.There was a lack of communication between Jones and Rodgers on several plays (the INT, Rodgers overthrowing Jones in the endzone). Rodgers made some errant passes to both Jordy and Jones through-out the game. He seemed like he was forcing the issue a lot.There was a fake field goal shovel pass from Tim Masthay to GB's back-up TE Tom Crabtree. I don't think we'll see that again.They started off by running Benson sure, but once they realized Cutler was beating himself and Rodgers was forcing throws and largely out of sync with his receivers, they decided to keep it on the ground. Also, we probably won't see Cutler play that abysmally or Marshall almost put up a goose egg again. The game just seemed kind of fluky. I don't see Benson touching the ball 25 times on average, no.

 

[munygon2]

I don't know why they can't use Benson to get at least 15-20 a game if it's working. Why not use the run to set up the pass a little bit more? GB generally has great receiver options but a few of those guys are getting older, banged up, getting traded, etc, and I think they may have more success with a little bit of balance instead of throwing on every down. I don't know why they signed him on if the plan wasn't to give him some work.

 

[The Dude]

I agree with Bloom - sell high.

This is a pass first team and they will pass first even in the red zone as they have done in the past.

 

[WiDDoW_MaKeR]

I just traded Bennett and Benson for Ryan Mathews. I already have Gronkowski so Bennett was my backup.

I did this because Benson just doesn't have a chance to be a high level performer. He can be very effective from a real football standpoint for the Packers, but he is not going to be a big fantasy performer. Aaron Rodgers is a huge ballhog around the end zone. He either wants to throw it in, or run it in himself. The best Benson can do this year is pick up chunks of yards in the middle of the field. He did great at that in week 2... and I don't see his upside getting much better than that. He will be used to keep the defenses honest.

 

[DevilintheDetail]

I agree with Bloom - sell high.This is a pass first team and they will pass first even in the red zone as they have done in the past.

After last week's game, Rodgers said that the plan going into the game was to get Benson 20 carries. I'm pretty sure that wasn't ever the game plan last year. They are already less of a "pass first" team. Probably in the red zone, too.

 

[meyerj31]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

I watched the game. Why "could you tell that it was an aberration as a whole"? Serious question, really. I've read a lot of quotes before and after the game from GB coaches and players about wanting to run a lot more and have more offensive balance. Basically, exactly what happened in the game. Why would that be an aberration? I mean, even in the first quarter they ran a sequence of four or five plays in a row where Benson got either a carry or catch. At that stage in the game, it certainly looks like that was by design.

The whole entire GB offense looked out of sync.

Maybe that's because they played the first two games against the 49ers and the Bears? As good as they can be offensively, when teams game plan well enough (and more importantly, have the players to execute the scheme) then the Packers get knocked off their rhythm. See KC and NYG games in 2011. This year the Pack has a few more than 2 team that can play 'em hard. Unfortunately 3 teams that can do that are the first three of the year.I'm expecting after a rough week 3 on the road at Seattle and that Packers players will be going for cheaper than they should. If you look at weeks 4-12, there are a ton of juicy passing defense matchups for Rodgers. Tuesday is gonna be a buy-as-low-as-you-can for any Packers skill player. I'm going to be paying anything reasonable to pick up Rodgers in the next week, including offers like Ryan/Romo+WR2/3 for him and I expect a lot of owners willing to sell.

 

[SameSongNDance]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

I watched the game. Why "could you tell that it was an aberration as a whole"? Serious question, really. I've read a lot of quotes before and after the game from GB coaches and players about wanting to run a lot more and have more offensive balance. Basically, exactly what happened in the game. Why would that be an aberration? I mean, even in the first quarter they ran a sequence of four or five plays in a row where Benson got either a carry or catch. At that stage in the game, it certainly looks like that was by design.

The whole entire GB offense looked out of sync.

Maybe that's because they played the first two games against the 49ers and the Bears? As good as they can be offensively, when teams game plan well enough (and more importantly, have the players to execute the scheme) then the Packers get knocked off their rhythm. See KC and NYG games in 2011. This year the Pack has a few more than 2 team that can play 'em hard. Unfortunately 3 teams that can do that are the first three of the year.I'm expecting after a rough week 3 on the road at Seattle and that Packers players will be going for cheaper than they should. If you look at weeks 4-12, there are a ton of juicy passing defense matchups for Rodgers. Tuesday is gonna be a buy-as-low-as-you-can for any Packers skill player. I'm going to be paying anything reasonable to pick up Rodgers in the next week, including offers like Ryan/Romo+WR2/3 for him and I expect a lot of owners willing to sell.

You just backed up my argument.

 

[meyerj31]

Ya wasn't arguing, just commenting.

Bensons is a buy-as-is but I think every other Packers player is going to be a buy-while-you-can after this week.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Ya wasn't arguing, just commenting.Bensons is a buy-as-is but I think every other Packers player is going to be a buy-while-you-can after this week.

If Rodgers is running on all cylinders, as he was last year, why would you buy Benson? I feel like, you either get the Rodgers from years prior or Benson bogs down his stats. You can't have it both ways, there's not enough snaps to go around. For my arguments sake, Benson has to touch the ball like he did last week (25 times). I'm still in the camp that he gets between 15-20 touches weekly. Again, he's a sell high in my eyes because I don't see him getting 25 touches on average, which he will need to put up 100+ total yard games.EDIT: Sorry, I misread what you said. Were in agreeance.

 

[MAC_32]

Who's buying?

 

[The Dude]

I agree with Bloom - sell high.This is a pass first team and they will pass first even in the red zone as they have done in the past.

After last week's game, Rodgers said that the plan going into the game was to get Benson 20 carries. I'm pretty sure that wasn't ever the game plan last year. They are already less of a "pass first" team. Probably in the red zone, too.

I believe they wanted to get him 20 carries - but I also believe Rodgers wanted all the touchdowns - and will do so going forward.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Who's buying?

The dude I sold him to.

 

[DevilintheDetail]

Who's buying?

I am, at least in leagues where I don't have him.

 

[MAC_32]

Who's buying?

I am, at least in leagues where I don't have him.

Well, I bought him in an IDP dyno for James Michael-Johnson.I wouldn't exactly call that selling high.

 

[Johnny Blood]

Ya wasn't arguing, just commenting.Bensons is a buy-as-is but I think every other Packers player is going to be a buy-while-you-can after this week.

If Rodgers is running on all cylinders, as he was last year, why would you buy Benson? I feel like, you either get the Rodgers from years prior or Benson bogs down his stats. You can't have it both ways, there's not enough snaps to go around. For my arguments sake, Benson has to touch the ball like he did last week (25 times). I'm still in the camp that he gets between 15-20 touches weekly. Again, he's a sell high in my eyes because I don't see him getting 25 touches on average, which he will need to put up 100+ total yard games.EDIT: Sorry, I misread what you said. Were in agreeance.

The Packers were about 16th in the league in rushing attempts last year. It is an illusion that they pass all the time.Same story the year before, right in the middle of the league in terms of rushing attempts.The only difference now is that it seems one guy will take the bulk of carries for the year.

 

[meyerj31]

Ya wasn't arguing, just commenting.Bensons is a buy-as-is but I think every other Packers player is going to be a buy-while-you-can after this week.

If Rodgers is running on all cylinders, as he was last year, why would you buy Benson? I feel like, you either get the Rodgers from years prior or Benson bogs down his stats. You can't have it both ways, there's not enough snaps to go around. For my arguments sake, Benson has to touch the ball like he did last week (25 times). I'm still in the camp that he gets between 15-20 touches weekly. Again, he's a sell high in my eyes because I don't see him getting 25 touches on average, which he will need to put up 100+ total yard games.EDIT: Sorry, I misread what you said. Were in agreeance.

The Packers were about 16th in the league in rushing attempts last year. It is an illusion that they pass all the time.Same story the year before, right in the middle of the league in terms of rushing attempts.The only difference now is that it seems one guy will take the bulk of carries for the year.

For sure. But right now he's going at a RB25 price which I still think is about right. He's not going to see the TD opportunities that higher backs will see, even if he's the 3-down back all year.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Ya wasn't arguing, just commenting.Bensons is a buy-as-is but I think every other Packers player is going to be a buy-while-you-can after this week.

If Rodgers is running on all cylinders, as he was last year, why would you buy Benson? I feel like, you either get the Rodgers from years prior or Benson bogs down his stats. You can't have it both ways, there's not enough snaps to go around. For my arguments sake, Benson has to touch the ball like he did last week (25 times). I'm still in the camp that he gets between 15-20 touches weekly. Again, he's a sell high in my eyes because I don't see him getting 25 touches on average, which he will need to put up 100+ total yard games.EDIT: Sorry, I misread what you said. Were in agreeance.

The Packers were about 16th in the league in rushing attempts last year. It is an illusion that they pass all the time.Same story the year before, right in the middle of the league in terms of rushing attempts.The only difference now is that it seems one guy will take the bulk of carries for the year.

I see what you're saying. I think Grant and Starks combined for around 265 carries last year (not counting Kuhn). I still feel like selling him last week was the right thing to do, at least for what I got in return.

 

[Warrior]

he is who we thought he was...a plodder

 

[DevilintheDetail]

he is who we thought he was...a plodder

Did you watch him play against the Bears last week? Certainly didn't look like he was plodding.

 

[hines]

buy, buy, buy. 15 or so carries a game plus the catches, which were amazing news for Benson owners if he can get 2 or 3 per game. I simply don't believe he will never score like some in these threads. I expect him to get in 5 or 6 times this year. 65 yards rushing, 2.5 recs for 20 yards per game so I expect something like 12 or 13 PPG. that was in rb10-rb15 range last year and you can get him for a much lower price it looks like. if you don't think starks will take carries buy him now

 

[The Dude]

Cieling is likely 8 tds - if you can get someone to pay you like he's worht 10 tds - it's a sell.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Too early to tell and I'm really not here to gloat, but he only has one carry so far and there's 13 minutes remaining in the 2nd. Now, this wasn't a week in which you'd play Benson, so no harm no foul, but I still believe the 25ish touches was an aberration.

Rodgers is under a #### ton of pressure though so he's checking down to Benson a bunch.

 

[Rovers]

Too early to tell and I'm really not here to gloat, but he only has one carry so far and there's 13 minutes remaining in the 2nd. Now, this wasn't a week in which you'd play Benson, so no harm no foul, but I still believe the 25ish touches was an aberration.Rodgers is under a #### ton of pressure though so he's checking down to Benson a bunch.

Rodgers has been sacked 7 times in the first half tonight. (make that 8) I think GB has to learn to run the ball with power, and Starks aint that guy. Hold on Benson.His value is going to go up.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Too early to tell and I'm really not here to gloat, but he only has one carry so far and there's 13 minutes remaining in the 2nd. Now, this wasn't a week in which you'd play Benson, so no harm no foul, but I still believe the 25ish touches was an aberration.Rodgers is under a #### ton of pressure though so he's checking down to Benson a bunch.

Rodgers has been sacked 7 times in the first half tonight. (make that 8) I think GB has to learn to run the ball with power, and Starks aint that guy. Hold on Benson.His value is going to go up.

I don't see the connection. His value will more than likely remain the same. RB2 in the right match-up, flex in a decent match-up, bench fodder against a stout run defense like SEA.

 

[Rovers]

Too early to tell and I'm really not here to gloat, but he only has one carry so far and there's 13 minutes remaining in the 2nd. Now, this wasn't a week in which you'd play Benson, so no harm no foul, but I still believe the 25ish touches was an aberration.Rodgers is under a #### ton of pressure though so he's checking down to Benson a bunch.

Rodgers has been sacked 7 times in the first half tonight. (make that 8) I think GB has to learn to run the ball with power, and Starks aint that guy. Hold on Benson.His value is going to go up.

I don't see the connection. His value will more than likely remain the same. RB2 in the right match-up, flex in a decent match-up, bench fodder against a stout run defense like SEA.

He's already run for 12 for 52 and 3 catches for 13 thru 3 quarters. Not stellar, but better than bench fodder against the stout Seattle D and again against CHI last week.

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

I'm very tempted to start Benson next week vs the Saints.

 

[Rovers]

The sell high advice, at least for another week, looks like bad advice. NO next week... I'm holding and starting.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Too early to tell and I'm really not here to gloat, but he only has one carry so far and there's 13 minutes remaining in the 2nd. Now, this wasn't a week in which you'd play Benson, so no harm no foul, but I still believe the 25ish touches was an aberration.Rodgers is under a #### ton of pressure though so he's checking down to Benson a bunch.

Rodgers has been sacked 7 times in the first half tonight. (make that 8) I think GB has to learn to run the ball with power, and Starks aint that guy. Hold on Benson.His value is going to go up.

I don't see the connection. His value will more than likely remain the same. RB2 in the right match-up, flex in a decent match-up, bench fodder against a stout run defense like SEA.

He's already run for 12 for 52 and 3 catches for 13 thru 3 quarters. Not stellar, but better than bench fodder against the stout Seattle D and again against CHI last week.

CHI has tackling problems, they couldn't bottle up Brown on several runs. He has looked good, but like I said he wasn't a sell high in the first place. He's as advertised.

I'm very tempted to start Benson next week vs the Saints.

He's a borderline RB1 play next week. You play every and any RB going up against NO.

 

[KellysHeroes]

with a couple of the RBs going down this weekend and a juicy match up coming up, you might get a good price for him.

I moved him for Olsen last week in a dynasty league, but otherwise I'm holding .

 

[Ray_T]

I agree. Benson is not a Sell high, he's a Sell low candidate. Man does he ever suck

 

[Txns8]

Trying to move he and Dez for Brandon Marshall, non-PPR league.

 

[Chazzhawk]

If you are selling, I would wait and do it after he plays the Saints

 

[Rovers]

If you are selling, I would wait and do it after he plays the Saints

That is likely the most astute opinion in this thread IMO. He could go off in a big way against NO this week. If he does... then his percieved value will go way up for some owners. I think his value is a bye week RB or an RB2 for flex's who start an RB1 and 4 WR's.

 

[hines]

If you are selling, I would wait and do it after he plays the Saints

That is likely the most astute opinion in this thread IMO. He could go off in a big way against NO this week. If he does... then his percieved value will go way up for some owners. I think his value is a bye week RB or an RB2 for flex's who start an RB1 and 4 WR's.

you can find 24 better RBs?

 

[Rovers]

If you are selling, I would wait and do it after he plays the Saints

That is likely the most astute opinion in this thread IMO. He could go off in a big way against NO this week. If he does... then his percieved value will go way up for some owners. I think his value is a bye week RB or an RB2 for flex's who start an RB1 and 4 WR's.

you can find 24 better RBs?

No... was that the question? Hanging over Benson's head is Green, and the eventual return of Starks. If someone thinks Benson is an RB1, then his value goes way up. While his value may go up and becomes a sell high, I'm still holding, unless I get a crazy offer. With McFadden as my one on a start 4 WR roster strategy, he's great injury insurance and a great RB 2 when I have byes and have to go with a 2 RB-3WR line up. The question was is he a sell high RB. After this week, I think he is certain to be a sell high. With him as my RB2, even then I won't sell. If I had Goodson as a handcuff for McFadden, I'd consider dealing him next week. I don't have Goodson. I won't trade Benson.

 

[LoneWolf]

Looking to unload Benson while I can. With Starks coming back and GB a pass first team, I don't see much upside for Benson. Sure Im starting him against the Saints, but after that I'm done with him.

 

[Nucker101]

I was sceptical that he was the right fit for this offense at first, but he's running very hard and well. I think he finishes as an RB2 and should have a big week against the Saints. Keep in mind that he's faced 3 very solid run defenses already. I'm buying.

 

[smackdaddies]

Packers RB have not been very reliable in FF for several years. If you got him rb 4/5 territory, and can sell him for RB 2/3 territory, and you have a need on your team, I would move him. He will have some good games, but I don't think any packer rb will score well enough to be a consistent starter.

 

[Biabreakable]

I don't think he's a "sell high" or "buy low" candidate to be completely honest. I think he'll be a RB2 in positive match ups, otherwise a solid flex play. I think he's as advertised. I'm also not convinced GB is more so committed to the run this year. Sure Benson got 20 carries against CHI, but anyone watching that game could tell you that it was an aberration as a whole. I think it'd be fair to expect between 15-20 total touches a games but also a ton of 80 total yards performances that will only be salvaged by a TD. If he's in your flex in such situations, that's fine though.

I watched the game. Why "could you tell that it was an aberration as a whole"? Serious question, really. I've read a lot of quotes before and after the game from GB coaches and players about wanting to run a lot more and have more offensive balance. Basically, exactly what happened in the game. Why would that be an aberration? I mean, even in the first quarter they ran a sequence of four or five plays in a row where Benson got either a carry or catch. At that stage in the game, it certainly looks like that was by design.

The whole entire GB offense looked out of sync.

Maybe that's because they played the first two games against the 49ers and the Bears? As good as they can be offensively, when teams game plan well enough (and more importantly, have the players to execute the scheme) then the Packers get knocked off their rhythm. See KC and NYG games in 2011. This year the Pack has a few more than 2 team that can play 'em hard. Unfortunately 3 teams that can do that are the first three of the year.I'm expecting after a rough week 3 on the road at Seattle and that Packers players will be going for cheaper than they should. If you look at weeks 4-12, there are a ton of juicy passing defense matchups for Rodgers. Tuesday is gonna be a buy-as-low-as-you-can for any Packers skill player. I'm going to be paying anything reasonable to pick up Rodgers in the next week, including offers like Ryan/Romo+WR2/3 for him and I expect a lot of owners willing to sell.

I think you both make some good points. I also think it was by design because Benson was not particularly loved by the Bears fans. There was extra motivation for him to play well. Cutler imploded and the whole thing worked out pretty well for Benson and the Packers, but it is not necessarily something I would expect repeated on a weekly basis. When Jennings is back should be more business as usual. Depends on your current team needs and what you could get back for him of course. Filling a hole at another position if you do not see yourself starting Benson much moving forward, even if you have to sell early seems like a good idea. If you need to start him then obviously you may need more back in return than some are willing to part with. I agree that selling high may be better after the Saints game. I would expect the Packers to try to keep Brees on the sideline as much as they can so Benson may have a lot of carries if they can keep a lead.

 

[Dez]

Who's buying?

The dude I sold him to.

Traded Benson for Stewart in a dynasty league.

 

[Kenny Powers]

at people worried about the return of James Starks

 

[DevilintheDetail]

After seeing the Packers clearly commit to the running game and learning during the Seahawks game that they need to run the ball to minimize the sacks, I think Benson is going to be a top 15 RB from this point forward.

 

[VaTerp]

After seeing the Packers clearly commit to the running game and learning during the Seahawks game that they need to run the ball to minimize the sacks, I think Benson is going to be a top 15 RB from this point forward.

Top 15? That seems overly optimistic but we can only hope.I just bought somewhat high on Benson in a 6 player package deal. But I'm 1-2 and thought I needed to shake some things up.I like what I've seen so far. He's run hard and had a few looks in the passing game. He's had decent production in 2 of 3 games with all 3 being very tough matchups.Going forward I do think he produces more than others think and believe once Rodgers and the offense start clicking it will only lead to more scoring opportunities for Benson. I think he has 10 TD potential.

 

[hines]

Packers RB have not been very reliable in FF for several years. If you got him rb 4/5 territory, and can sell him for RB 2/3 territory, and you have a need on your team, I would move him. He will have some good games, but I don't think any packer rb will score well enough to be a consistent starter.

how could anyone have him as a RB5? and what other Packer RB will do anything? Green and Kuhn haven't got any carries and Starks is supposed to come back behind everyone

 

[VaTerp]

Packers RB have not been very reliable in FF for several years. If you got him rb 4/5 territory, and can sell him for RB 2/3 territory, and you have a need on your team, I would move him. He will have some good games, but I don't think any packer rb will score well enough to be a consistent starter.

The last two years they've given nothing in FF but in 2009 Grant had over 1400 total yards and 11 TDs. That same year Rodgers attempted a career high 541 passes, threw for over 4400 and had 30 TDs.I don't see any reason why Benson can't have similar production to Grant in 09'. Only thing that scares me is his fumblitis. He's got to hang on to the football. But I think he's a very good fit for GB and will do well to balance the offense. He will have to score 8+ TDs IMO to be a solid RB2. I think he does it.

 

[DevilintheDetail]

After seeing the Packers clearly commit to the running game and learning during the Seahawks game that they need to run the ball to minimize the sacks, I think Benson is going to be a top 15 RB from this point forward.

Top 15? That seems overly optimistic but we can only hope.I just bought somewhat high on Benson in a 6 player package deal. But I'm 1-2 and thought I needed to shake some things up.I like what I've seen so far. He's run hard and had a few looks in the passing game. He's had decent production in 2 of 3 games with all 3 being very tough matchups.Going forward I do think he produces more than others think and believe once Rodgers and the offense start clicking it will only lead to more scoring opportunities for Benson. I think he has 10 TD potential.

Well, he's played against three of the best run defenses in the league and is still RB 26. Even if he'd only averaged 35 yards more per game, he'd already be ahead of McCoy at the #15 spot. I think that will be pretty easy for him to pull off and I think he'll average more than 1 TD every 3 games. I think he has top 10 upside for sure and that top 15 is a pretty easy mark for him to hit.

 

[Thumper]

No doubt about it Benson is a buy not a sell...Benson has faced three of the best run D's in the league and has put up very solid numbers. More importantly GB seems to be willing to give him the oppritunity to be "the man" in a powerful offense. Assuming health Benson has the potential to be a high end #2 or dare I say a low end #1.