Cedric Benson = week 1 starter (1 Viewer)

[prgromek]

Packers RB Alex Green confirmed that Cedric Benson is "leading off" at tailback in the season opener versus the 49ers.

Green suggested the coaching staff will elaborate on the backfield plans Wednesday, with the two backs being used in a "combo" approach. "He's doing a great job of picking things up," Green said of Benson. "He's a very smart player." We suspect the majority of Green's playing time will come in obvious passing situations. Benson will be the primary early-down back.

 

[spider321]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

 

[Shutout]

It's sems like forever since a packer rb was truly relevant and that was before the emergence of Nelson and before Cobb.

So... What kind of value we looking at here? Topm30 rb?

 

[Dismattle]

http://www.foxsportswisconsin.com/08/28/12/Green-Benson-leading-off-in-Packers-back/landing_packers.html?blockID=781813&feedID=5069

GREEN BAY, Wis. -- It sounds like Cedric Benson is about to officially be named the Packers' starting running back for this season.

 

[meyerj31]

RB30ish sounds about right.

800 rush, 200 pass? Maybe 3-4 TDs. Nothing great here, but that's about what a RB3 gets you.

My big problem with him is that there's no upside. There are plenty of other RB3/flex players that have massive upside if an injury happens ahead of them. I'm thinking guys like Jonathan Stewart, CJ Spiller, D. Will, Ingram. I'd rather have one of those guys and get a weekly RB2 or better if an injury happens to the other guy in the backfield.

 

[Phil4]

So Starks is gone ??

 

[bostonfred]

I can't remember the last time a talented running back in cinci looked washed up after playing against pittsburgh and baltimore for years, then went to a championship contender that had all of the pieces in place except a running back.

 

[VibeBox]

My big problem with him is that there's no upside.

idk, if something were to happen to rodgers i can imagine the ensuing cluster #### would involve a whole lot of handing benson the ball and hoping

 

[hines]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant. if he gets goal-line work, his TDs should rise and his YPC should skyrocket with the soft fronts he will face, especially after facing constant 8 man fronts vs the best defenses in the league the last few years

 

[smackdaddies]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

Lol. Packers are middle of the pack when it comes to pass run split

 

[Kleck]

I can't remember the last time a talented running back in cinci looked washed up after playing against pittsburgh and baltimore for years, then went to a championship contender that had all of the pieces in place except a running back.

That one worked out great. I'd rather have Dillon at the time the Pats did, but Benson will fill in fine. Lots of good reports coming out of Green Bay on him.

 

[Gr00vus]

I can't remember the last time a talented running back in cinci looked washed up after playing against pittsburgh and baltimore for years, then went to a championship contender that had all of the pieces in place except a running back.

liar

 

[unckeyherb]

His upside in that offense is a top 10-15 RB. If he really is the starting RB he can produce. He's not elite but he's the best they've had on a long time. Out on a limb upside projection : 1200 yards/10 TDs. There I said it.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant.

Benson is not better than pre-injury Ryan Grant.I will be extremely surprised (though pleased) if Benson is within sneezing distance of 1,000 yards.

 

[Hoosier16]

How did the OP get "will carry the load" out of that news clip?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Grant and Starks combined for just 267 carries and 3 rushing TDs last year. Benson really isn't significantly better than either of those guys IMO -- I really don't see GB changing the run-pass ratio on the best offense in football for Cedric friggin' Benson. He also isn't going to be a big factor in the passing game.

I don't see 1000 total yards here or more than about 5 TDs. Someone else is welcome to him.

 

[LHUCKS]

said this a while ago.

 

[fatness]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

Lol. Packers are middle of the pack when it comes to pass run split

Kind of amazing how often that gets posted and rebutted, isn't it?

 

[Captain Hook]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant.

Benson is not better than pre-injury Ryan Grant.I will be extremely surprised (though pleased) if Benson is within sneezing distance of 1,000 yards.

Benson has had over 1000 yards the past three seasons - yes Packers don't run as much as the Bengals but otoh Rodgers will open huge holes for him plus his presence will force defenses to account for him - I don't think he equals Grant or Green (no Ahman) numbers but he is clearly a decent RB3/Flex play and could end up better than that

 

[Mr.Pack]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

Lol. Packers are middle of the pack when it comes to pass run split

Kind of amazing how often that gets posted and rebutted ignored, isn't it?

 

[Hoosier16]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

Lol. Packers are middle of the pack when it comes to pass run split

Kind of amazing how often that gets posted and rebutted, isn't it?

Huh? Ratio of RB carries to pass attempts last year:

        RSH  ATT  Run/Pass    1  TB  271  586  0.462    2  DET  322  668  0.482    3  BUF  310  576  0.538    4  GB  318  548  0.58    5  TEN  345  582  0.593    6  CLE  337  566  0.595    7  CAR  308  515  0.598    8  NO  397  659  0.602    9  NE  373  612  0.609    10  WAS  361  589  0.613    11  ARI  338  549  0.616    12  PHI  339  550  0.616    13  NYG  373  587  0.635    14  MIN  330  511  0.646    15  KC  327  500  0.654    16  DAL  375  571  0.657    17  IND  352  534  0.659    18  ATL  402  593  0.678    19  STL  376  547  0.687    20  SD  400  581  0.688    21  PIT  384  535  0.718    22  NYJ  393  544  0.722    23  CIN  405  534  0.758    24  BAL  413  542  0.762    25  SEA  387  507  0.763    26  OAK  407  521  0.781    27  CHI  407  470  0.866    28  MIA  412  469  0.878    29  JAX  429  468  0.917    30  SF  417  450  0.927    31  DEN  409  426  0.96    32  HOU  509  465  1.095

 

[The Kerminator]

said this a while ago.

Well, aren't you the genius.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

How did the OP get "will carry the load" out of that news clip?

Leading off and carrying the load are very different things.

 

[DoubleG]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant.

Benson is not better than pre-injury Ryan Grant.I will be extremely surprised (though pleased) if Benson is within sneezing distance of 1,000 yards.

Benson has had over 1000 yards the past three seasons - yes Packers don't run as much as the Bengals but otoh Rodgers will open huge holes for him plus his presence will force defenses to account for him - I don't think he equals Grant or Green (no Ahman) numbers but he is clearly a decent RB3/Flex play and could end up better than that

Color me suprised about the number of people calling Benson rushing for 1k "crazy" or "impossible". He has done it on lesser teams with weaker passing games to keep opposing defenses honest AND against tougher divisional foes. Not only will I not be suprised if he gets to 1000 yards rushing, I will actually be suprised (barring injury or Alex Green turning into LT2) if he doesn't come close. I could fairly easily see a statline of 240 carries for 4.1 ypc for 984 - add a few more carries or a slightly better YPC vs. the softer fronts he should see and he's there.

In terms of RB3s with upside - the problem is you need something to happen (i.e. an injury to the guy in fornt of them). You need no such "luck" for Benson to produce. He is not sexy, but he is consistant. He kinda reminds me of Rudi Johnson - nothing too spectacular, just steady production.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I can't remember the last time a talented running back in cinci looked washed up after playing against pittsburgh and baltimore for years, then went to a championship contender that had all of the pieces in place except a running back.

I detect the foul stench of sarcasm here. Nice job BF, Corey Dillon is the only correct answer here. I see Benson on a clear path for 1,000 yds and 7-8 TD, anything that RB3 does for me beyond would be serious gravy.

 

[Raider Nation]

said this a while ago.

Well, aren't you the genius.

You spelled "pathetic, insufferable, moronic attention-whore" incorrectly.

 

[DoubleG]

said this a while ago.

Well, aren't you the genius.

You spelled "pathetic, insufferable, moronic attention-whore" incorrectly.

take a bow.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant.

Benson is not better than pre-injury Ryan Grant.I will be extremely surprised (though pleased) if Benson is within sneezing distance of 1,000 yards.

Benson has had over 1000 yards the past three seasons - yes Packers don't run as much as the Bengals but otoh Rodgers will open huge holes for him plus his presence will force defenses to account for him - I don't think he equals Grant or Green (no Ahman) numbers but he is clearly a decent RB3/Flex play and could end up better than that

Color me suprised about the number of people calling Benson rushing for 1k "crazy" or "impossible". He has done it on lesser teams with weaker passing games to keep opposing defenses honest AND against tougher divisional foes. Not only will I not be suprised if he gets to 1000 yards rushing, I will actually be suprised (barring injury or Alex Green turning into LT2) if he doesn't come close. I could fairly easily see a statline of 240 carries for 4.1 ypc for 984 - add a few more carries or a slightly better YPC vs. the softer fronts he should see and he's there.

In terms of RB3s with upside - the problem is you need something to happen (i.e. an injury to the guy in fornt of them). You need no such "luck" for Benson to produce. He is not sexy, but he is consistant. He kinda reminds me of Rudi Johnson - nothing too spectacular, just steady production.

So you must have the rest of the GB running backs getting well under 100 combined carries then? Is Benson really good enough to be more than the lead guy in a RBBC?

 

[meatwad1]

there is huge upside here, the last time the Packers featured one back (Grant in 09) he put up a stat line of 282 rush, 1253 yds, 11 TD. Benson is probably better than Grant.

Benson is not better than pre-injury Ryan Grant.I will be extremely surprised (though pleased) if Benson is within sneezing distance of 1,000 yards.

Benson has had over 1000 yards the past three seasons - yes Packers don't run as much as the Bengals but otoh Rodgers will open huge holes for him plus his presence will force defenses to account for him - I don't think he equals Grant or Green (no Ahman) numbers but he is clearly a decent RB3/Flex play and could end up better than that

Color me suprised about the number of people calling Benson rushing for 1k "crazy" or "impossible". He has done it on lesser teams with weaker passing games to keep opposing defenses honest AND against tougher divisional foes. Not only will I not be suprised if he gets to 1000 yards rushing, I will actually be suprised (barring injury or Alex Green turning into LT2) if he doesn't come close. I could fairly easily see a statline of 240 carries for 4.1 ypc for 984 - add a few more carries or a slightly better YPC vs. the softer fronts he should see and he's there.

In terms of RB3s with upside - the problem is you need something to happen (i.e. an injury to the guy in fornt of them). You need no such "luck" for Benson to produce. He is not sexy, but he is consistant. He kinda reminds me of Rudi Johnson - nothing too spectacular, just steady production.

I agree here...people are going to be very surprised at Benson's production here. The Packers have always been a team that has wanted to run, but simply had not had the talent the last few years, so even though they were running the results were not great. Having Benson will keep drives alive and will enable the Pack to run even more plays and take even more chances deep. Benson is looked down upon because he is a super hyped college tailback that has very little big play ability. He is not snazzy in the least, but he possesses one great element to his game (as you put it); consistency. His ability to consistently get 3 - 4 yards on every play will be a big advantage for a team like Green Bay because, due to Rodgers deadly accuracy, they will literally have the ability to move the ball non-stop. If you think hard, one might envision that it is the perfect fit. If there is a team in the NFL that might average 40 a game this year, it is the Packers. I am pretty bullish on Benson. As far as Green goes, he will be given a shot and they will go with what works. So far, in preseason games, Green has not looked like he needs to be given a ton of playing time, so i am not worried about him. I am looking to buy Benson and all Packers for that matter. If I have extra slots, I am even stashing guys like Driver, Kuhn, Jones, and Cobb. That is how much better I think Benson makes this offense.

 

[fatness]

Huh? Ratio of RB carries to pass attempts last year:

link

18th last year in % of pass plays, 14th the year before.

 

[meatwad1]

Grant and Starks combined for just 267 carries and 3 rushing TDs last year. Benson really isn't significantly better than either of those guys IMO -- I really don't see GB changing the run-pass ratio on the best offense in football for Cedric friggin' Benson. He also isn't going to be a big factor in the passing game.I don't see 1000 total yards here or more than about 5 TDs. Someone else is welcome to him.

Grant and Starks are not even close. GB will be taking what the defense gives them. A player like Benson gives them such an advantage. There are almost never negative yardage plays. Do you realize how a team like Green Bay will be able to toy with teams when they are constantly in 2 and 5 or 6 or 3rd and short situations? That is what people are losing sight of here. Benson is not a home run back by any stretch of the imagination, but people forget that there could be four or five (Jennings/Nelson/Finley/Jones/Cobb) legit homerun threats on the field at one time, so Benson does not ever need to be a homerun threat, he just needs to do what he has always done...get 3 - 4 yards on almost every play. I see 1500 combined yards with 8 - 10 tds.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Guy had had Carson Palmer who has never been the same since his knee injury, then he had Andy Dalton, Rex Grossman way back in Chicago...safe to assume he has never had a defense totally focused on the QB and WRs before? It's going to feel like Christmas for him every Sunday.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Week 1 follow-up: "Oh well you can't expect too much against SF lol."

 

[Hoosier16]

Huh? Ratio of RB carries to pass attempts last year:

link

18th last year in % of pass plays, 14th the year before.

Those count QB runs as running plays. That doesn't mean much to the RB. The list I posted only includes RB carries versus pass attempts.

 

[meatwad1]

Week 1 follow-up: "Oh well you can't expect too much against SF lol."

lol...San Fran was great last year, but remember that the NFL landscape is littered with one year wonders. The Pack has been rolling for many many years now.31 - 20 Packers

 

[fatness]

Those count QB runs as running plays. That doesn't mean much to the RB. The list I posted only includes RB carries versus pass attempts.

They are running plays.I'm sure you could weed out this or that to make the stats look whatever way you want, but it's misleading in my opinion. Every offensive play they either pass or run. You can't eliminate some plays.It's like saying "if you take away his 47 yard TD reception he only had 3 fantasy points".

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Those count QB runs as running plays. That doesn't mean much to the RB. The list I posted only includes RB carries versus pass attempts.

They are running plays.I'm sure you could weed out this or that to make the stats look whatever way you want, but it's misleading in my opinion. Every offensive play they either pass or run. You can't eliminate some plays.It's like saying "if you take away his 47 yard TD reception he only had 3 fantasy points".

I'm sure Deangelo and JStewart are excited that they had 14 more rushing TDs to their name last year thanks to Cam Newton.

 

[sho nuff]

Huh? Ratio of RB carries to pass attempts last year:

link

18th last year in % of pass plays, 14th the year before.

Those count QB runs as running plays. That doesn't mean much to the RB. The list I posted only includes RB carries versus pass attempts.

Well...it also counts a flare pass...or those quick passes to the outside where the WR takes a step back to catch the ball as a pass.When they are used basically as defacto running plays for teams like GB who did not have a strong run game.

IMO...he is better than Starks and Grant last year...and where he will pick up some solid points for you is in garbage time late in games where he is simply better at grinding out the clock than those two were.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Has Green Bay even had a running play in the last 2 years?

Not since Grant was good, Benson is looking like a good RB2 this yr

 

[Todem]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.

Well worth the risk where I picked him.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.Well worth the risk where I picked him.

Benson as your RB4 = good value.Benson as your RB2 = not so much.

 

[wingm@n]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.Well worth the risk where I picked him.

Agree. As long as you're not reaching too early for Benson in your draft, there isn't much downside to stashing him on your bench. I don't see him having "lottery ticket" type upside but wouldn't be surprised to see him turn into a solid RB2/Flex player.

 

[Dought Man]

Week 1 follow-up: "Oh well you can't expect too much against SF lol."

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

How did the OP get "will carry the load" out of that news clip?

Leading off and carrying the load are very different things.

Packers | Trio of backs ready to fill void Tue Aug 28, 11:23 PMGreen Bay Packers RBs Cedric Benson and Alex Green are expected to see a bulk of the carries early in the regular season if RB James Starks (turf toe) is not ready to go. Starks has progressed slower than the team hoped. RB Brandon Saine (hamstring) is also in the mix for touches if Starks isn't ready.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.Well worth the risk where I picked him.

Benson as your RB4 = good value.Benson as your RB2 = not so much.

How about best ball and part of a platoon for RB2/3?

 

[Please See Mine]

Those count QB runs as running plays. That doesn't mean much to the RB. The list I posted only includes RB carries versus pass attempts.

They are running plays.I'm sure you could weed out this or that to make the stats look whatever way you want, but it's misleading in my opinion. Every offensive play they either pass or run. You can't eliminate some plays.It's like saying "if you take away his 47 yard TD reception he only had 3 fantasy points".

What? If you are trying to project the number of carries for a running back, it is certainly useful to look at the number of designed running plays and not include Rodgers' many scrambles. (as APK pointed out as well.)

 

[Manster]

Guy had had Carson Palmer who has never been the same since his knee injury, then he had Andy Dalton, Rex Grossman way back in Chicago...safe to assume he has never had a defense totally focused on the QB and WRs before? It's going to feel like Christmas for him every Sunday.

This is what I keep coming back to. This situation just seems like a good fit to me.

 

[smackdaddies]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.Well worth the risk where I picked him.

Benson as your RB4 = good value.Benson as your RB2 = not so much.

How about best ball and part of a platoon for RB2/3?

Best ball yes. Platoon - i don't like that for RB position. As a bye week fill in, good stuff

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Took a shot on him as a RB4 in a redraft last night.Well worth the risk where I picked him.

Benson as your RB4 = good value.Benson as your RB2 = not so much.

How about best ball and part of a platoon for RB2/3?

Standard scoring you can probably live with him in that role, but he isn't likely to be a strength. PPR he's a liability as anything higher than a RB4.200 - 840 - 5, less than a catch per game.

 

[EBF]

I like his chances to surprise people. He's getting old and he has a lot of mileage, but there might be 1-2 good seasons left in his body. It feels a lot like when Corey Dillon went to New England. That move didn't get a lot of fanfare either, but it turned out great. In both cases, people underrated the player's prospects because the team he was going to didn't have a reputation for running the ball, but IMO that's because neither team had talented runners prior to the veteran's arrival.

Dillon was easily better than any RB the Patriots had previously had during the Brady era. Benson, while not quite as good as Dillon, is easily better than any RB the Packers have had during the Rodgers era. If he's not completely washed up and he stays healthy, I think he can have a big year. The team is going to pass a lot, but they are also going to score a lot of TDs. And with defenses mainly focused on stopping the pass, I expect there to be some pretty big lanes open for Benson. I think his YPC can jump up to ~4.5 due to that factor alone.