Michael Bennett continues to struggle at blocking (1 Viewer)

[packersfan]

And yet it's readily apparent Mike Tice doesn't agree with you. Why is that?

Mike Tice loves O. Smith and views him basically as another starter (straight from the horses mouth). Michael Bennett may "start" by virtue of veteran seniority status and 1st round draft pick status, but make no mistake....O. Smith will get his touches.LINK

Q: Talk about the problem of a lot of depth at running back.

A: It's a great problem; we have four thoroughbreds that we can rely on to the point where we can give the old man Moe (Williams) a little break here during the first couple of days and let him kind of ease his way into it and let Michael (Bennett) get his feet going again and get some confidence and obviously see if Mewelde Moore is the player we thought he was when we lucked into getting him in the fourth round. We love Onterrio Smith; we think he's basically another starter. So we have an excellent problem; I don't look at it as a problem though.

You may also want to look for the stories which say Bennett is going to get 15-20 carries a game this season too just to provide a little more overall clarity to the discussion. It's really very simple and again, the pro-Smith crowd really seems unwilling to accept it: If Smith is the better RB he'd be starting. All Mike Tice should care about is winning football games, so that means putting his best players on the field as starters. It's that simple. Tice may love Onterrio Smith and he may view him as another starter, but the fact of the matter is he isn't starting. Bennett is and unless Bennett falters (highly unlikely) or gets hurt again (certainly possible) then everything we're seeing and hearing out of the Vikings strongly indicates Bennett will be the primary RB this season.

Oh and you do realize the Packers view Najeh Davenport as essentially another starter as well, don't you? Just some food for thought for you to chew on.

 

[psychobillies]

As for the poster who thinks Moore is better than O.... Moore was never rated a top-5 back in this class, and is viewed as third-down back material. That's the best he'll be in the NFL.

Have you ever seen Moore play? He was one of the most accomplished backs in college football history on a team with one of the worst O-lines to ever play 1A ball.I'm not saying he's the next Walter payton, but I will compare him with another 4th rd pick regardless of how he was ranked in any particular class.Should I list all of the running backs who have had tremendous success despite being ranked outside of the top five in their class?

 

[Dman30]

LINK

Q: Talk about the problem of a lot of depth at running back.

A: It's a great problem; we have four thoroughbreds that we can rely on to the point where we can give the old man Moe (Williams) a little break here during the first couple of days and let him kind of ease his way into it and let Michael (Bennett) get his feet going again and get some confidence and obviously see if Mewelde Moore is the player we thought he was when we lucked into getting him in the fourth round. We love Onterrio Smith; we think he's basically another starter. So we have an excellent problem; I don't look at it as a problem though.

Interesting. Mike Tice seems to think Michael Bennett is lacking some confidence right now thus he needs more reps. Meanwhile, Mike Tice adamantly states his liking for Onterrio Smith and views him as another starter. Sure seems like Mike Tice likes Onterrio, don't get your panties too wet Bennett owners.

 

[switz]

Have you ever seen Moore play? He was one of the most accomplished backs in college football history on a team with one of the worst O-lines to ever play 1A ball.I'm not saying he's the next Walter payton, but I will compare him with another 4th rd pick regardless of how he was ranked in any particular class.Should I list all of the running backs who have had tremendous success despite being ranked outside of the top five in their class?

Yes, I've seen Moore play. Great college RB. Great college RB. He'll probabl be a great pass catching RB in the Pros, but not a great runner. Your observation was cool, and I know he has alot of fans, but from my POV he's not starting RB material. Mine just happens to agree more with the pro scouts than yours. Scouts have bveen wrong, so have I, maybe you're right. Just right now I don't think so.

 

[psychobillies]

Have you ever seen Moore play? He was one of the most accomplished backs in college football history on a team with one of the worst O-lines to ever play 1A ball.I'm not saying he's the next Walter payton, but I will compare him with another 4th rd pick regardless of how he was ranked in any particular class.Should I list all of the running backs who have had tremendous success despite being ranked outside of the top five in their class?

Yes, I've seen Moore play. Great college RB. Great college RB. He'll probabl be a great pass catching RB in the Pros, but not a great runner. Your observation was cool, and I know he has alot of fans, but from my POV he's not starting RB material. Mine just happens to agree more with the pro scouts than yours. Scouts have bveen wrong, so have I, maybe you're right. Just right now I don't think so.

I hear you. Like I said before, it'll be a few years before we'll even see what he can do. So until then it's back to O vs Bennett....

 

[Gr00vus]

"All Mike Tice should care about is winning football games, so that means putting his best players on the field as starters. It's that simple."Incorrect. That means putting the right players on the field in the right situations. We've established that Tice in fact does this many times over in this thread. We've established that that does and probably will cut into Bennett's time on the field. It's not about loving Onterrio - it's about not loving Bennett as much as some.Yet the only counters we get are people saying the same thing over and over gain without addressing the stats or what's actually being said here in camp. That's a sure recipe for dissappointment.

 

[packersfan]

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press regarding Onterrio Smith. Not a quote, but the reporter almost certainly got the info from talking to coaches since that's how beat writers (the good ones anyway) put stuff like this together: "He is the team's No. 2 rusher behind Michael Bennett and likely will get about 10 carries a game." One other thing of note: Tice said he wasn't looking to trade Onterrio Smith during all the Ricky Williams hubub, but he did say he'd listen to offers. Bennett, however, was "off limits." Gee, imagine that.

 

[packersfan]

Yet the only counters we get are people saying the same thing over and over gain without addressing the stats or what's actually being said here in camp. That's a sure recipe for dissappointment.

Incorrect. I have addressed the stats and utilized them to prove rather convincingly who Mike Tice favors when he has a healthy group of RBs. And if Onterrio Smith was the better fit and a better all-around RB than Michael Bennett, he'd be starting and getting the max carries. That would be putting the players in the best chances to win -- at least according to those who believe Smith is better than Bennett. Yes it really is that simple.

 

[packersfan]

And from the Minneapolis Star Tribune in breaking down the Vikings' offense:

DIFFERENCE MAKER | RB Michael Bennett

2003 stats: 447 yards rushing, one touchdown on 90 carries (5.0-yard average). 12 catches for 132 yards (11.0).

Comment: Missed the first seven games of 2003 because of a broken foot that was surgically repaired. Didn't have time to regain 2002 Pro Bowl form, but is back on schedule because of hard work, a sleeker build and re-energized desire. Will start and handle the bulk of the load, but Onterrio Smith, Moe Williams and possibly rookie Mewelde Moore also will get some touches.

Linehan's take: "Michael was basically going through his own training camp in November last year. We kind of halfway forgot just how explosive he can be."

It sure seems like the beat writers who cover the team have no doubts about who will be the Vikings' primary RB this season.

 

[switz]

And if Onterrio Smith was the better fit and a better all-around RB than Michael Bennett, he'd be starting and getting the max carries.

You know that's flawed logic.I'm not sure anyone here thinks Bennett is not the starter, rather not as talented. Regardless, Bennett is the veteran of the two and will be the starter just like Watters, Hearst, and Bettis were despite the team and others viewing some of the youngsters as having better potential. Teams do not shake things up unless absolutely necessary. Bennett is a GOOD rb, so the team doesn't need to switch it up.pf, can you link your last quote please?

 

[{Syrus}]

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press regarding Onterrio Smith. Not a quote, but the reporter almost certainly got the info from talking to coaches since that's how beat writers (the good ones anyway) put stuff like this together: "He is the team's No. 2 rusher behind Michael Bennett and likely will get about 10 carries a game."

If Michael Bennett is as good as you think he is, then why can't he keep Onterrio Smith on the bench? Onterrio Smith coming in for 10 carries a game is more than just a breather for Michael Bennett considering Moe Williams is bound to get some carries/receptions also. Onterrio Smith is an impressive RB that the coaches seem to be making a concerted effort to get into the game, at Bennett's expense. To put it into perspective, I doubt Michael Turner gets 10 carries a game in San Diego with a bonafide starter in Ladainian Tomlinson on the roster.

 

[reg]

pf, can you link your last quote please?

http://www.startribune.com/stories/510/4902376.html

 

[packersfan]

And if Onterrio Smith was the better fit and a better all-around RB than Michael Bennett, he'd be starting and getting the max carries.

You know that's flawed logic.I'm not sure anyone here thinks Bennett is not the starter, rather not as talented. Regardless, Bennett is the veteran of the two and will be the starter just like Watters, Hearst, and Bettis were despite the team and others viewing some of the youngsters as having better potential.

And that is where your logic is flawed, switz. Bennett has only been in the league two more years than Smith. He's not some grizzled vet like Watters, Hearst or Bettis. He's basically on even footing with Smith in terms of NFL experience. Yes he's more of a veteran, but hardly by a considerable measure as with someone like Watters or Hearst or Bettis. If that's really your strongest reason for why he's the starter you should come up with something a lot better because that simply doesn't hold any weight in my opinion. If Smith was better, he'd be starting. He looked damn good in his two starts last season; we both agree on that. And yet Bennett remains the starter. And as far as not wanting to shake things up, the Vikings went 6-10 in 2002 and choked away a playoff spot last year in the final game. I'd say they're in desperate need for a shakeup. Here's the link to the story about the team's offense: http://www.startribune.com/stories/510/4902376.html

 

[packersfan]

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press regarding Onterrio Smith. Not a quote, but the reporter almost certainly got the info from talking to coaches since that's how beat writers (the good ones anyway) put stuff like this together: "He is the team's No. 2 rusher behind Michael Bennett and likely will get about 10 carries a game."

If Michael Bennett is as good as you think he is, then why can't he keep Onterrio Smith on the bench?

LOL. He is keeping him on the bench. That's the point. Bennett is the starter and Smith is the backup. Bennett is going to get the bulk of the carries. That's what all of the reporters who cover the team for a living have been telling us for months. And while beat writers obviously aren't perfect, if they're any good the predictions they make come after at least some consultation with the coaching staff. Williamson, for example, briefly covered the Packers a few years back and he was a legitimate source of info at that time so I doubt he's regressed now that he's covering the Vikings. And now you're bringing in Michael Turner to the argument? Here's the reason why Onterrio Smith will get more carries than Michael Turner: He's better. He deserves more carries than Michael Turner does. The Vikings have one helluva backup in Onterrio Smith. The Chargers do not. And just so we're clear I don't think Bennett's as good as Tomlinson, so your Turner analogy is even further off the mark. Some starters are better than others and some backups are better than others. The Vikings have a tremendous luxury in having Smith as their backup (and Moe Williams as well). They're loaded at RB, no doubt about that. Look, I've never once argued Michael Bennett is a 25-carry a game RB. He isn't. But can he get 18 carries a game? Absolutely. And that seems to be the Vikings intent this season. If they average 30-plus carries a game again this season and Bennett gets 18. I'm going to take that. Given his three-year YPC average, that projects to a season of more than 1,300 yards. I'll happily take that from him. If he gets 16 carries a game, that projects to 1,200 yards. I'll take that as well. Of course, if we look to his last full season, his YPC was 5.1 so those numbers now would project to 1,468/1,305. I'll take those as well from Bennett if he's on my roster given his talent. Quite honestly, I don't have a problem with Smith getting 10 carries a game if he's Bennett's backup. Like the whole Davenport/Green thing last season (which I tried to also warn people about who were seriously downgrading Green), I think that will only serve to increase the chances the starter (in this case Bennett) stays healthy the entire season. That's the thing a lot of folks seem to be missing here. If I'm a Bennett owner, Onterrio Smith doesn't scare me because I think he could end up helping Bennett's production in the long run. But if I'm an Onterrio Smith owner I'm damn scared of Michael Bennett because in all probability Bennett is going to keep Smith's numbers down and keep him planted on your bench all season long barring injury.

 

[switz]

And that is where your logic is flawed, switz. Bennett has only been in the league two more years than Smith. He's not some grizzled vet like Watters, Hearst or Bettis. He's basically on even footing with Smith in terms of NFL experience. Yes he's more of a veteran, but hardly by a considerable measure as with someone like Watters or Hearst or Bettis. If that's really your strongest reason for why he's the starter you should come up with something a lot better because that simply doesn't hold any weight in my opinion. If Smith was better, he'd be starting. He looked damn good in his two starts last season; we both agree on that. And yet Bennett remains the starter. And as far as not wanting to shake things up, the Vikings went 6-10 in 2002 and choked away a playoff spot last year in the final game. I'd say they're in desperate need for a shakeup.

When Hearst kept Barlow on the bench, he was recovering two years away due to injury, the team lost it's best RB in Garner, and was going through huge changes. One would say Barlow should have started. Yet some dismiss Hearst's winning the job because he was the vet, and not exactly a grizzled vet either. Yet he kept Barlow down. Yes, Bennett has two years on Smith, he is the vet, the team will start him because of that.No flaw in the logic at all... a vet is a vet is a vet...BTW, you know why they choked away the playoff appearance? Because Bennett couldn't get them a first down on 2nd and 2, they couldn't play ball control, and they kicked a FG with too much time left on the clock.For O to be expected to get 10 carries a game, means that Bennett would have to get 20 to get 66% of the load, assuming no other RBs touch the ball, he'll never do it...This literally has Hearst/Barlow written all over it... except Hearst was the better all-around RB when Barlow first entered the scene - in MIN Smith is the better all around RB.

 

[Confucius]

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press regarding Onterrio Smith. Not a quote, but the reporter almost certainly got the info from talking to coaches since that's how beat writers (the good ones anyway) put stuff like this together: "He is the team's No. 2 rusher behind Michael Bennett and likely will get about 10 carries a game."

If Michael Bennett is as good as you think he is, then why can't he keep Onterrio Smith on the bench?

LOL. He is keeping him on the bench. That's the point.

Onterrio Smith getting 10 carries a game and Michael Bennett getting 15-18 carries a game is not in any way "Bennett keeping O. Smith on the bench." That's a RBBC. Might want to wake up there packersfan and not let your Michael Bennett blinders make you look more foolish on this board.Priest Holmes kept Larry Johnson on the bench.Ladainian Tomlinson will keep Michael Turner on the bench.Michael Bennett WILL NOT keep Onterrio Smith on the bench.

 

[packersfan]

Sorry switz, but your analogy's are extremely flawed because Bennett does not have the sizeable experience factor in his favor the other RBs did. Again, he and Smith are almost on equal footing in terms of experience. I'm going to make this very clear again: If the Vikings average 30+ carries again this season, I believe Bennett will get at least 60% of them if he's healthy (and I could easily see him getting a higher percentage). That translates to a season of more than 1,350 yards. That will almost certainly put him in the Top 10-15 in terms of rushing yardage. I have no problems taking that kind of production from Bennett. Personally I think he has an excellent chance to top 1,500 total yards this season based on his talent and the talent of the Vikings' offense. I only have 2 questions about Michael Bennett: 1) Can he stay healthy for the entire season; and 2) What will his TD production be? That's it. If I get Bennett, I'm not worried about Smith getting 10 carries a game for the reasons I stated above.

 

[packersfan]

Priest Holmes kept Larry Johnson on the bench.Ladainian Tomlinson will keep Michael Turner on the bench.

Michael Bennett is not as talented as Holmes or Tomlinson and anyone who brings those RBs up in terms of an analogy is the one who's looking foolish.

 

[packersfan]

As far as me having "Bennett blinders on" I'm sorry to disappoint you but I don't. Instead, I'm merely looking at all of the evidence at hand and attempting to formulate a projection for this particular situation and this particular RB. There are a number of RB situations that are of heavy interest to fantasy owners this season. Philadelphia, Carolina and Buffalo come to mind. And I'm as interested as everyone else to see how those situations play out and how the RB carries will be divied up. But what's interesting - to me anyway - is that the Vikings' situation may be the most heavily debated among fantasy owners and yet that is arguably the one that has the most definitive answer at this point in time. Go figure.

 

[Confucius]

Priest Holmes kept Larry Johnson on the bench.Ladainian Tomlinson will keep Michael Turner on the bench.

Michael Bennett is not as talented as Holmes or Tomlinson and anyone who brings those RBs up in terms of an analogy is the one who's looking foolish.

Again, let me make this simple for you packersfan. And I'm using info from your previous posts here.Onterrio Smith getting 10 carries a game and Michael Bennett getting 15-18 carries a game is a RBBC.

 

[packersfan]

Priest Holmes kept Larry Johnson on the bench.Ladainian Tomlinson will keep Michael Turner on the bench.

Michael Bennett is not as talented as Holmes or Tomlinson and anyone who brings those RBs up in terms of an analogy is the one who's looking foolish.

Again, let me make this simple for you packersfan. And I'm using info from your previous posts here.Onterrio Smith getting 10 carries a game and Michael Bennett getting 15-18 carries a game is a RBBC.

And allow me make it simple for you, if Bennett gets 18 carries a game (which I think is a likely number given his talent), that'll be 60% of the carries and that means he will get the bulk of the carries and it will make him a very nice fantasy pick this season. And that's all I've ever argued.

 

[Routilla]

OK kids, enough whining. Draft whoever you think is the #1 guy and move on. Personally, I know they can both put up quality #2RB #s so if I grab Bennett in the late 2nd/early 3rd then I'll be looking for O in the 4th/5th also. It's clear the MIN offense should be highly combustible this season. It's risky to not back up Bennett with O, but it's sheer bliss to grab O before the Bennett owner snaps to backing him up.

 

[Confucius]

And allow me make it simple for you, if Bennett gets 18 carries a game (which I think is a likely number given his talent), that'll be 60% of the carries and that means he will get the bulk of the carries and it will make him a very nice fantasy pick this season.

Do you realize that in 36 career games Michael Bennett has only gotten 18+ carries in 8 of those games?? That's only 22% of his games in his entire career.And you expect Bennett to get 18 carries a game for 16 games in one single season?? Now that's laughable. :rotflmao: He hasn't done that in 3 seasons combined.And let's not even mention Onterrio Smith's 10 carries, I'm trying to keep it simple for you.

 

[switz]

And allow me make it simple for you, if Bennett gets 18 carries a game (which I think is a likely number given his talent), that'll be 60% of the carries and that means he will get the bulk of the carries and it will make him a very nice fantasy pick this season.

Do you realize that in 36 career games Michael Bennett has only gotten 18+ carries in 8 of those games?? That's only 22% of his games in his entire career.And you expect Bennett to get 18 carries a game for 16 games in one single season?? Now that's laughable. :rotflmao: He hasn't done that in 3 seasons combined.And let's not even mention Onterrio Smith's 10 carries, I'm trying to keep it simple for you.

Nevermind that if Onterrio gets 10 carries, Moe gets 4 or 5 which I tihnk is undeniable, for Bennett to get 60% it would require 25 carries from Bennett for him to get 60%. Additionally, there will likely be other touches stolen from him when the team is in passing/catchup mode, because Smith and Moe are better receivers, as well as blockers. Additionally, it's likely that Moore will see one to two touches every other game or so. Bennett getting 25 touches a game is unrealistic. You are talking about the team running it's RBs 40-42 times a game, not likely.Actually the team will liekly only run it 30 times, take away Onterrios 10 and Moes 5 it leaves Bennett with 15-16, which is realistic. 15*16*5.1=1224 yards = very likely. Maybe 4-5 TDs.Smith will likely get 10*16*5.4 = 864 yards plus 9-10 TDs, plus receptions...Bennett = 152 points (2nd-3rd round)Smith = 138 points (8th-10th round)Which has more value to you?Why 5.1? Bennett's best season YPC.Why 5.4? Smith's best season YPC.Reasonably I expect Bennett to hover around 4.8, and Smith to be about 5.3.

 

[Colin Dowling]

switz,I'm interested in how you conclude that Smith will continue to be a 5+ ypc back, considering the precedent for that (Portis and Portis alone, IIRC) is pretty rare.Also, I'm interested in how you concluded that Onterrio would get the goalline/TD duties, and not Moe.I can certainly agree with your idea about carry ditribution, and I even think its plausible that Bennett WON'T be the leader in TDs among the runners, but I think some of the above conclusions are a bit of a reach.Colin

 

[Biabreakable]

You guys are still talking about this?? The Vikings and Mike Tice like to run the ball.Bennett is going to start. He makes the defense stay in thier lanes and cover thier gaps which creates holes in the passing game for Moss to exploit. If they opposing defense plays undisciplined that is exactly what the Vikings are looking for and Michael Bennett will exploit it. The opposing defense is really under a lot of pressure when Bennett is in the game. More so than when Smith is.When it comes time for tougher yardage the Vikings will bring in Smith who is better suited to execute in that role. And the Vikings will still throw out of those situations. The defense never can feel very sure of what play the Vikings will run. If they bring up a safety against Smith in short yardage Culpepper will audible and burn them.Moe Williams will play 3rd and long because he is the best blocker of the 3 as well as being well rounded in everything you might ask a RB to do. Once again the offense is very flexible and will take high percentage plays against how they read the defense.As far as the blocking issue have you ever seen Culpepper take the role of a FB lead blocker on end arounds and other misdirection plays? Because he will and he is bigger than most Lbers and DBs in the league. Seriously I would not worry about who is blocking for Culpepper too much. BTW I have seen Favre do the same thing.Still not sure what all the fuss is about here.Bennett is RB 1 60-65% of the rushing playsSOD is RB 2 20-25% of the rushing plays probobly more goal line touchesMoe is RB 3 10-20% of the rushing plays mostly on 3rd downsAll are worth drafting and become more valuable if one of the others gets injured and misses time. Nothing is going to stop Minnesota from running the ball a lot and I expect they will be a top 5 rushing offense once again this year. And because of the depth at RB Culpepper will probobly not run the ball quite as much as he has in the past so theres a few more carries that I expect will be distributed mostly between SOD and Moe.

 

[switz]

switz,I'm interested in how you conclude that Smith will continue to be a 5+ ypc back, considering the precedent for that (Portis and Portis alone, IIRC) is pretty rare.Also, I'm interested in how you concluded that Onterrio would get the goalline/TD duties, and not Moe.I can certainly agree with your idea about carry ditribution, and I even think its plausible that Bennett WON'T be the leader in TDs among the runners, but I think some of the above conclusions are a bit of a reach.Colin

Well, Bennett behind that line ran for 5.1 in 2002 and 5.0 in 2003, it's not likely Smith after averaging 5.4 last season is going to lose .5 YPC behind that line, when he's only learned the pro game better. I think Bennett's will drop a bit because I expect his long runs will stay down as they did last seaosn, and with more rushes the YPC will decrease.As for the assumption about O getting more goalline carries than Moe, it's just that, but the fact he was so productive last year in limited duty makes me believe he will be used in split duty with Moe. Interesting quotes recently from Tice about replacing Moe, about Moore, it seems O will have more opportunity at the GL this year than Moe. Thats an assumption though.Smith had what 5 TDs last season in limited duty? He'll likely get twice that IMO with more carries and catches this year.

 

[Loco Barlow]

And allow me make it simple for you, if Bennett gets 18 carries a game (which I think is a likely number given his talent), that'll be 60% of the carries and that means he will get the bulk of the carries and it will make him a very nice fantasy pick this season.

Do you realize that in 36 career games Michael Bennett has only gotten 18+ carries in 8 of those games?? That's only 22% of his games in his entire career.And you expect Bennett to get 18 carries a game for 16 games in one single season?? Now that's laughable. :rotflmao: He hasn't done that in 3 seasons combined.And let's not even mention Onterrio Smith's 10 carries, I'm trying to keep it simple for you.

So over Bennett's career he has a 22% chance of having an 18+ carry game? Not very good supporting evidence for packerfans assumption that Bennett will get 18 carries a game this year. If Bennett received 18+ carries in 22% of his games this coming season he will only get 18+carries in 3.5 of his games. Yep, that's some stud. :rotflmao:

 

[packersfan]

And allow me make it simple for you, if Bennett gets 18 carries a game (which I think is a likely number given his talent), that'll be 60% of the carries and that means he will get the bulk of the carries and it will make him a very nice fantasy pick this season.

Do you realize that in 36 career games Michael Bennett has only gotten 18+ carries in 8 of those games?? That's only 22% of his games in his entire career.And you expect Bennett to get 18 carries a game for 16 games in one single season?? Now that's laughable. :rotflmao: He hasn't done that in 3 seasons combined.And let's not even mention Onterrio Smith's 10 carries, I'm trying to keep it simple for you.

I've acknowledged Smith's 10 carries a game. In fact, I was the one who brought it up. You need to pay attention. But as a refresher course since you're so determined to ignore the point being made: In 2002, Bennett averaged 16 carries per game. Last season, the Vikings averaged 31 rushes per game. The dominant theme that has come out of the Vikings' organization for the last several months is that Bennett will be the feature RB and he will receive the bulk of the carries. So that would appear to exclude any kind of a 50-50 split between him, Smith, Williams and whoever. He'll clearly get more than that based on what we've been told so far. There's no reason at this point in time to believe otherwise unless you're simply determined to ignore everything you're being told. Assuming you're not, then let's look at possible projections: In 2002, Bennett averaged 16 carries a game. Given how he's more experienced now and has worked hard in the off-season to become stronger and so forth, it's hardly inconceivable that he could receive a higher number of carries this season. In fact, it's more logical to expect that to occur especially given what we've heard about the situation so far (i.e. Bennett receiving the bulk of the carries -- just trying to help you keep up ). And it's not like it's a huge jump from 16 to 18 in the first place. So if the Vikings average 31 carries again this season and Bennett gets 18 per game, that translates to about 60% of the carries -- hardly an unlikely number given how we're being told Bennett will get the bulk of the work. Using his 5.1 YPC from 2002 (his last season completely healthy season which makes it a more accurate tool to use for projections in this case), that projects to a season of more than 1,460 yards if he can stay healthy. Even if we reduce the number of carries per game to 16 which is what he received in 2002 and is certainly a likely number, that still projects to a season of more than 1,300 yards. Throw in the likely 200-plus receiving yards he's likely to receive and you're looking at a RB capable of producing more than 1,500 total yards this season which has been my point all along. Keep in mind 16 carries per game barely qualifies under the Vikings' plan to give Bennett the "bulk of the carries" since it's only slightly more than 50% of the carries. So even if he has a 51-49 split, you're still looking at a RB capable of putting up more than 1,500 total yards this season. With regard to Smith getting 10 carries a game, if he reaches that level, instead of it negatively impacting Bennett significantly, the more likely scenario is that it will be Moe Williams' rushing attempts which will suffer greatly, not Bennett's (though I still expect Williams to be a huge factor in the passing game and likely the goal-line as well). When the discussion of Smith getting more involved takes place, it should be Williams, not Bennett, who is brought into the discussion first since Smith will be replacing Williams in the pecking order, not Bennett. Also, if Bennett and Smith are running more, I would expect Culpepper to scramble less and for his carries to decrease (which, by the way, is exactly what happened last season - with more RB options, Culpepper scrambled less in 2003 than he did in 2002. I would anticipate that trend continuing in 2004 given the overall talent in the Minnesota backfield).

 

[Gr00vus]

"he dominant theme that has come out of the Vikings' organization for the last several months is that Bennett will be the feature RB and he will receive the bulk of the carries. So that would appear to exclude any kind of a 50-50 split between him, Smith, Williams and whoever. He'll clearly get more than that based on what we've been told so far. There's no reason at this point in time to believe otherwise unless you're simply determined to ignore everything you're being told."Bzzzzzt wrong answer. Your reading and statistical skills seem to need some sharpening.Bennett 1st and 2nd down, Moe 3rd down and passing situations, Smith 4th quarter - reference quote I posted several replies ago.Statistical breakdowns - Moe/Smith receive nearly all receptions, nearly all opportunities from the opponents' 20 and in (ie. short yardage) - and are much more productive than Bennett in those situations. They also are the two running backs (not Bennett) who carry the load when the team is ahead, and almost exclusively in the 4th quarter. In the last four games of the season, in those games Onterrio didn't dominate the carries it was clearly a rbbc, with a 40-30-30 split.Tell me how that guarantees Bennett more than 16 touches or 60% of the touches a game. You can't, because it doesn't, unless you're a permanent resident of mathemagic land - which I'm starting to think you are.If anyone's whistling in the dark here it's packer's_fan, who I think we should just come out and name Bennett owner.I'm not pimping Smith, all I am saying, and have said, and continue to say, is this kind of myopic utopian view of Bennett's opportunities this year will have you headed for a fall. But since you seem hell bent on that course, I might actually start rooting for you to take that fall. Maybe then you'll learn something.

 

[Big Daddy Kane]

And it's not like it's a huge jump from 16 to 18 in the first place.

So why has Bennett only received 18 or more carries a game in only 8 of his 36 career games, for a 22% chance of an 18+ carry game?Actually, I find your logic amusing. Clearly you are a Bennett owner who thinks Bennett will be toting the rock 18 times a game. One small problem. He's never done that before on a consistent basis and there really is no reason to believe he will this year with Onterrio Smith getting 10 carries a game plus whatever work Moe Williams receives. Your losing buddy, give it up.

 

[packersfan]

"he dominant theme that has come out of the Vikings' organization for the last several months is that Bennett will be the feature RB and he will receive the bulk of the carries. So that would appear to exclude any kind of a 50-50 split between him, Smith, Williams and whoever. He'll clearly get more than that based on what we've been told so far. There's no reason at this point in time to believe otherwise unless you're simply determined to ignore everything you're being told."Bzzzzzt wrong answer. Your reading and statistical skills seem to need some sharpening.Bennett 1st and 2nd down, Moe 3rd down and passing situations, Smith 4th quarter - reference quote I posted several replies ago.

And you should read the reports I posted which said Bennett will receive "the bulk of the carries." Toss in the report from earlier in the off-season which said the Vikings want Bennett to receive 18-20 carries a game and you have the dominant theme I mentioned. And no, I'm not a Bennett owner. Sorry.

 

[packersfan]

Clearly you are a Bennett owner who thinks Bennett will be toting the rock 18 times a game.

Nope, I'm not a Bennett owner and actually I would anticipate Bennett getting around 16-17 carries a game based on everything we've been told so far. But you're right I am going to give this up. I've stated my point and I've used numerous statistics and reports to support it. We'll see how it all plays out.

 

[Big Daddy Kane]

I would anticipate Bennett getting around 16-17 carries a game based on everything we've been told so far.

So Onterrio Smith gets 10 carries a game and Michael Bennett gets 16-17 carries a game. That's called a RBBC, buddy. Clearly, if Michael Bennett were as good as you think he is, Onterrio Smith wouldn't be stealing so much of his playing time.

 

[Gr00vus]

" And you should read the reports I posted which said Bennett will receive "the bulk of the carries.""I saw it, and it means two things - jack and squat.Bulk of the carries could be 51%, or referencing the end of LAST YEAR, something like 40-30-30.And carries != touches. One thing that helps make a running back valuable for ff is that they also catch passes sometimes. Sounds to me like Bennett won't be doing much of that. Then of course if you factor the likelihood that Bennett won't be getting many touchdowns, he'll be doing most of his work running between the 20's. So, he won't play for a quarter of the game clock (4th quarter), he'll be out on 3rd downs and passing downs, he'll be out inside the red zone - bulk of the carries doesn't look so good now does it?Oh and of course there's the whole injury thing, but we can't predict that so we shouldn't go into it....

 

[packersfan]

I would anticipate Bennett getting around 16-17 carries a game based on everything we've been told so far.

So Onterrio Smith gets 10 carries a game and Michael Bennett gets 16-17 carries a game. That's called a RBBC, buddy. Clearly, if Michael Bennett were as good as you think he is, Onterrio Smith wouldn't be stealing so much of his playing time.

OK, two points only because I really can't stand it when people misinterpret what I'm saying. Then I'm done. I mean it. 1. I have never said this wasn't a RBBC situation. What I have said is that based on everything we have been told and all of the evidence we've been given Michael Bennett is clearly the guy Mike Tice prefers to be his feature RB; not Onterrio Smith. That is the point I have been making. I have never said Smith won't be involved. He obviously will be, but if you were paying any attention at all to what I said, I believe that could end up being a positive for Bennett, not a negative (see Ahman Green/Najeh Davenport last season for a perfect illustration of why I feel that way).

2. I have never said Michael Bennett was a "stud" nor have I said Onterrio Smith stinks. What I have said is I think Bennett is a very good RB with tremendous potential. I have also clearly stated that I believe Smith is a talented RB with tremendous potential. Of the two, I happen to think Bennett is better. Personal opinion is all. Apparently, Mike Tice feels the same way which is the more relevent opinion for any fantasy football discussion.

I'm sure all of this will somehow get twisted around yet again, but so be it. I enjoy the discussion and the Bennett-Smith debate is likely going to be a hot topic all season long. If it's this intense now, I can't imagine what it will be like after the Vikings' first pre-season game.

 

[Loco Barlow]

Michael Bennet gets 12-14 carries a gameOnterrio Smith gets 10 carries a gameMoe Williams gets 5 carries gameDaunte Culpepper gets 4 rushes a gameBennett owners are fooling themselves.

 

[Hinezer]

As for the poster who thinks Moore is better than O.... Moore was never rated a top-5 back in this class, and is viewed as third-down back material. That's the best he'll be in the NFL.

I didn't see anything about Moore mentioned, so you are probably talking about when I said that I saw Moore as the one taking playing time from Bennett. This has nothing to do with Moore being better than Onterrio, because he isn't. Moore would be brought in to be a receiver out of the backfield because he has been amazing in that role in TC so far, with many long receptions.

 

[Hinezer]

Just wanted to add... week's 9-13 have no correlation to this seaon. Smith was in Tice's doghouse for not working at the little things as har as Tice wanted.

This is not true at all, Onterrio Smith was never in Tice's doghouse. He didn't play because Bennett was the featured back in those games, not because of anything Smith did. Don't try to pass his zeros off as anything than exactly that.

 

[switz]

As for the poster who thinks Moore is better than O.... Moore was never rated a top-5 back in this class, and is viewed as third-down back material. That's the best he'll be in the NFL.

I didn't see anything about Moore mentioned, so you are probably talking about when I said that I saw Moore as the one taking playing time from Bennett. This has nothing to do with Moore being better than Onterrio, because he isn't. Moore would be brought in to be a receiver out of the backfield because he has been amazing in that role in TC so far, with many long receptions.

Sorry Hinezer. You simply missed the three or four posts about Moore. It was posted... in fact it was psychobillies...but I agree with Moore being a great receiver, but I doubt he'll steal receptions from O. In fact, unless he becomes a great blocker this season, I don't expect him to get more than 1-2 touches every othe game in clear passing situations where Moe would be in, because it seems like they are loooking to have him replace Moe. Oh, and he'll steal kickoff returns from O, that much was already determined. He should be pretty good back there.

 

[RudeDog]

Hey guys, don't we have enough spin doctors running around this election year. Lets not "sound bite" the story without providing a link so the reader can get the full message.This was obviously a blatant attempt at withholding information and giving no means of linking to the source. I will no longer take anything you say seriously.

 

[switz]

Just wanted to add... week's 9-13 have no correlation to this seaon. Smith was in Tice's doghouse for not working at the little things as har as Tice wanted.

This is not true at all, Onterrio Smith was never in Tice's doghouse. He didn't play because Bennett was the featured back in those games, not because of anything Smith did. Don't try to pass his zeros off as anything than exactly that.

Really?

AP Article

Rookie Onterrio Smith stepped in nicely, too, once he convinced the coaching staff his knowledge, maturity and pass-blocking ability were up to NFL standards.

It may also have had something to do with Smith being given the KR role...

 

[Hinezer]

Just wanted to add... week's 9-13 have no correlation to this seaon. Smith was in Tice's doghouse for not working at the little things as har as Tice wanted.

This is not true at all, Onterrio Smith was never in Tice's doghouse. He didn't play because Bennett was the featured back in those games, not because of anything Smith did. Don't try to pass his zeros off as anything than exactly that.

Really?

AP Article

Rookie Onterrio Smith stepped in nicely, too, once he convinced the coaching staff his knowledge, maturity and pass-blocking ability were up to NFL standards.

It may also have had something to do with Smith being given the KR role...

This is referring to his holdout in training camp and the fact that he had maturity problems that dropped him to the 4th round in the draft. And also the fact that he was a rookie, which usually means you have to prove you can play to the coaching staff.He didn't get carries those three weeks because he didn't have a role in the offense. When it became clear that Bennett was not recovered and healthy enough to take the entire load, Onterrio regained his role. All I'm saying is that it is very possible for that to happen again and Onterrio will be left without a role and only we get a couple of carries a game.

In training camp, it has been Bennett with the 1st team almost exclusively. Today in the scrimmage vs. the Chiefs, Onterrio didn't get any snaps with the 1st team offense. He mainly was the 2nd team RB. He is banged up and sat out the night practice, so that might have had something to do with it.

BTW, the AP story was from a Bengals site, what's with that? What does it have to do with the Bengals?

 

[switz]

BTW, the AP story was from a Bengals site, what's with that? What does it have to do with the Bengals?

That's a good question... I really dont know... Onterrio didn't really step in nicely until late in the season, so I don't think it was referring to training camp struggles. I recall specifically Tice commenting on Smith not working hard enough when Bennett came back, and that's why he wasn't used in the offense. I just couldn't find it...Anyway, your thought about him not having a role goes contrary to everything Tice has said this offseason.Additionally, Smith has gotten quite a bit of work with the first team in TC, but he missed acouple practices with a minor strain. Moe Williams has sat out most practices, but I doubt you're going to say he has no role.Tice has also run Moore with the first team, so I'm not sure where you get Bennett "exclusively" with the first team...BTW, where do you get your info that Smith ran only with the second team against KC, from this article it would seem like Smith saw plenty of first team action, unless KC's first team defense was playing MIN's second team offense (unlikely)

Neither Chiefs defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham nor Vikings offensive coordinator Scott Linehan showed much in the way of play-calling flavor — fans aren't the only eyes watching these preseason practices — but facing a team that has talent like Daunte Culpepper, Randy Moss, Onterrio Smith and Bennett was still a major challenge....The Vikings were working without Pro Bowl center Matt Birk, so it would be foolish to say that the Chiefs dominated up front, but the big fellas did show aggressiveness, burst and an ability to get into the backfield, where they caused problems for Bennett and Smith.

The reference to Birk indicates first team OL...However, Tice did say he wanted to run Bennett more in camp to get his confidence back, as well as getting a good look at Moore. Smith they already love, and Williams is getting rested as "the old man."BTW, Bennett looked very good against the Chiefs in the scrimmage, he broke a couple long ones, and abused a rookie, but then again it was a rookie On a side note, how weak are the Minny papers in covering the Vikes compared to KC's covering of the Chiefs...

 

[Don't Noonan]

I fully expect Bennett to start the first couple of games and get the majority of the carries. However, Onterrio will make the most of his carries and outshine Bennett as the superior back. Onterrio will be starting in Minnesota by week 3 with or without a Bennett injury. Onterrio is going to be a STUD in this league. Mark my words.

 

[{Syrus}]

I fully expect Bennett to start the first couple of games and get the majority of the carries. However, Onterrio will make the most of his carries and outshine Bennett as the superior back. Onterrio will be starting in Minnesota by week 3 with or without a Bennett injury. Onterrio is going to be a STUD in this league. Mark my words.

 

[Hinezer]

I fully expect Bennett to start the first couple of games and get the majority of the carries. However, Onterrio will make the most of his carries and outshine Bennett as the superior back. Onterrio will be starting in Minnesota by week 3 with or without a Bennett injury. Onterrio is going to be a STUD in this league. Mark my words.

Isn't this what was said last year except it was Moe, and Onterrio was actually fighting for the starting spot?

 

[Hinezer]

BTW, the AP story was from a Bengals site, what's with that?  What does it have to do with the Bengals?

That's a good question... I really dont know... Onterrio didn't really step in nicely until late in the season, so I don't think it was referring to training camp struggles. I recall specifically Tice commenting on Smith not working hard enough when Bennett came back, and that's why he wasn't used in the offense. I just couldn't find it...Anyway, your thought about him not having a role goes contrary to everything Tice has said this offseason.Additionally, Smith has gotten quite a bit of work with the first team in TC, but he missed acouple practices with a minor strain. Moe Williams has sat out most practices, but I doubt you're going to say he has no role.Tice has also run Moore with the first team, so I'm not sure where you get Bennett "exclusively" with the first team...BTW, where do you get your info that Smith ran only with the second team against KC, from this article it would seem like Smith saw plenty of first team action, unless KC's first team defense was playing MIN's second team offense (unlikely)

Neither Chiefs defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham nor Vikings offensive coordinator Scott Linehan showed much in the way of play-calling flavor ? fans aren't the only eyes watching these preseason practices ? but facing a team that has talent like Daunte Culpepper, Randy Moss, Onterrio Smith and Bennett was still a major challenge....The Vikings were working without Pro Bowl center Matt Birk, so it would be foolish to say that the Chiefs dominated up front, but the big fellas did show aggressiveness, burst and an ability to get into the backfield, where they caused problems for Bennett and Smith.

The reference to Birk indicates first team OL...However, Tice did say he wanted to run Bennett more in camp to get his confidence back, as well as getting a good look at Moore. Smith they already love, and Williams is getting rested as "the old man."BTW, Bennett looked very good against the Chiefs in the scrimmage, he broke a couple long ones, and abused a rookie, but then again it was a rookie On a side note, how weak are the Minny papers in covering the Vikes compared to KC's covering of the Chiefs...

My info on Smith was from training camp reports from people that attended the scrimmages. It wasn't in the exact words and exclusively isn't the best word for me to use.As for today, Moore was used exclusively (and was awesome from what I read) today because Bennett, Onterrio and Moe were all out with minor injuries. Bennett's injury probably had something to do with tackle by one of the Chiefs DBs who brought him down by his facemask and a started a fight. I don't think any of them are seriously hurt at all. My guess is that they probably don't want to risk them with the bad blood flowing between the Vikings and Chiefs.I never implied that I thought Smith wouldn't have a role because of training camp reports. I'm basing it on last season. When Bennett made his comeback, Tice wanted him to be the featured back. During that span, Onterrio had a very limited role. Later when it was clear that Bennett wasn't healthy enough to shoulder the full load, Smith was brought into the picture.That brings us to this year, where Tice wants Bennett to be the featured back. I'm not saying that Smith is going to have a very limited role, I'm saying it is possible. Smith's role is as a featured back. He isn't going to take over the short yardage role from Moe. He might have a role as a pass catcher, but I think Moore might get that. Smith has to steal carries from Bennett's workload and IMHO Tice would prefer that they have one player getting a bulk of the carries.And you are right about the Minnesota papers. I rarely read their articles because the reports from fans that attend practices are much better.

 

[Don't Noonan]

I fully expect Bennett to start the first couple of games and get the majority of the carries. However, Onterrio will make the most of his carries and outshine Bennett as the superior back. Onterrio will be starting in Minnesota by week 3 with or without a Bennett injury. Onterrio is going to be a STUD in this league. Mark my words.

Isn't this what was said last year except it was Moe, and Onterrio was actually fighting for the starting spot?

It does sound very similar doesn't it. The difference is that Tice wasn't on the same page as a lot of us on these message boards. From what Onterrio showed me at Oregon and what he did when he got the opportunity to play last year I have no reason to change my opinion on him. He excelled last year when given a chance to play and I'd be willing to bet he continues to do so. I don't think Bennett is bad by any means, just not nearly as good as Onterrio. Time will tell I guess.