andybren Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 I say Landon is more versatile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 I say Landon is more versatile.I picked Reggie McNeal just because he is probably far and away the more gifted of them all.Chris Perry and Landon Johnson both have some durability concerns. Tab inpresses the hell out of me but it's hands down Reggie, as far as talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGrizzlyBaer Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 landon is the only one who has proved anything, he led the team in tackles his rookie year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadJohnson-85 Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Doesnt Tab Perry already start at kick returner? Or was he put on there for WR? But I voted Chris Perry. IMO I think Perry could be a really good RB if ML let him start or play more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiLBurn Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Doesnt Tab Perry already start at kick returner? Or was he put on there for WR? But I voted Chris Perry. IMO I think Perry could be a really good RB if ML let him start or play more.I like Chris Perry as much as the next guy but he doesn't have the durabilty to be the starter. He hasn't lasted a full season, yet, as the backup/change of pace RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CantStop85 Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Write-in: Chris Henry...too bad that talent's going to waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spor_tees Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Chris Perry leading the votes...he must have his family registered on this site and voting for him. How can a guy that can't play a full season as a Third down back, supposed to be the most talented non-starter?That's about like saying I am the most talented guy not in the NBA...only if I was 4 feet taller. Seriously...whoever voted for Chris Perry needs to lay off the Hen-weed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 I'll try to lay off the Hen-weed... but in the meantime I'll explain why I picked Perry.Firstly, the question isn't about durability. He clearly has durability problems... and hopefully he'll be able to get over them, but even if he doesn't, that doesn't have anything to do with his "talent."Secondly, in the time he's been able to play, he has shown the ability to do the most. Landon has surely been servicable... but Perry stops and changes directions the best I've seen any RB do since Barry Sanders. The difference is that Sanders was also durable. Perry didn't have the durability problems in college... so hopefully it has just been a fluke, but it looks like it will be another case of a 1st round bust because of the injuries.You're right that Perry's talent is difficult to see because we've had so few opportunities to witness it between him being often injured, and stuck behind a Pro-Bowler... but neither of those things diminish his talent. When he's on the field, he the most fun player to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Vote --> Landon JohnsonI'm not a Perry hater, and I have no doubts about his ability. He is a talented player, but in NFL terms, I don't know how well it can translate. If he were to start for an entire season and not get hurt, I wouldn't expect any flashy numbers. I'd be surprised if he could get above 3.7 yards per carry.Landon has proven, in my opinion, moreso than the other three, that he is a very talented player and that his talent can be put to consistent and productive use on the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Landon because hes a future starter, and would be a starter now if Odell wasent there in the 2nd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spor_tees Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 I'll try to lay off the Hen-weed... but in the meantime I'll explain why I picked Perry.Firstly, the question isn't about durability. He clearly has durability problems... and hopefully he'll be able to get over them, but even if he doesn't, that doesn't have anything to do with his "talent."Secondly, in the time he's been able to play, he has shown the ability to do the most. Landon has surely been servicable... but Perry stops and changes directions the best I've seen any RB do since Barry Sanders. The difference is that Sanders was also durable. Perry didn't have the durability problems in college... so hopefully it has just been a fluke, but it looks like it will be another case of a 1st round bust because of the injuries.You're right that Perry's talent is difficult to see because we've had so few opportunities to witness it between him being often injured, and stuck behind a Pro-Bowler... but neither of those things diminish his talent. When he's on the field, he the most fun player to watch.Come on now...Barry Sanders? This guy is so indecisive when he hits the hole he can't decide paper or plastic. He tries to make too many moves, which is good for highlight reels, bad for yardage. When he gets the outside toss he doesn't concentrate on getting to the corner and turns it up too soon, ala the Indy game on the 4th down toss that he couldn't get a first down.Seriously...Barry Sanders? I listen to some of your points and I agree whole heartedly in some posts, but by you trying to compare Two-carry Perry to Barry Sanders you should be banned from ever being able to say Barry Sanders in your posts again. The only stat Perry stood out in was receptions, and that is one of the most decieving stats in the league. Just ask the old Houston Oilers run-n-gun system. Which is more important to a football team, a guy that catches 50 balls @ 7 yards per or a guy that catches 35 balls @ 15 yards per?Chris Perry averaged 6.4 yards per reception last year, mostly on third and long situations where the defense was already willing to give up5-6 yards to stop the big play and first down...you can make all the catches in the world but if they result in a 4th and 2 what difference does that make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 I'll go with Landon as he has already been there and produced at a high level. C. Perry would be a real close second and with the potential, could very easily take the top spot. I'll tell you what, if C. Perry ever gets healthy, we are set. McNeal has so much versatility and potential as well, but we will have to see how he responds to his new position and what kind of production we get...WHODEY !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 No player on the Bengals entire roster is more versatile than Chris Perry. Seriously, that guy can hurt himself in every way possible, including making the bed, combing his hair, or scrambling eggs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schweinhart Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 If it includes rooks, I'm gonna say Whitworth because he could prove to be the 1st backup at all the O-line positions other than center. That could turn out to be much, much more vital than what either Landon or Chris Perry produce this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybren Posted June 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Whitworth is a good idea, assuming he lives up to the hype. When thinking up additional options, Stacy and Bennie crossed my mind, but we really haven't seen their football skills yet. And I don't consider special teamers as starters, with the possible exception of the kicker. If Tab was the permanent KR without any mention of being #3 or #4 WR, then maybe that would count as being a starter.Ultimately I think the debate comes down to pure athletic talent (which we may or may not see on Sunday) vs. overall skill level (which would be displayed every Sunday, long term). Both obviously have their value, but if I had to choose, I'd pick the long-term versatility.But then again, maybe I'm talking about "favorite" instead of "most talented". It's such a beauty pageant concept, isn't it? What's next, Mr. Congeniality? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derekshank Posted June 19, 2006 Report Share Posted June 19, 2006 Come on now...Barry Sanders? This guy is so indecisive when he hits the hole he can't decide paper or plastic. He tries to make too many moves, which is good for highlight reels, bad for yardage. When he gets the outside toss he doesn't concentrate on getting to the corner and turns it up too soon, ala the Indy game on the 4th down toss that he couldn't get a first down.C'mon man. Quit busting my balls. I wasn't saying he was as good as Barry Sanders. If he was that, he'd be starting. I said he can cut and change direction better than anyone I've seen since Barry Sanders. He hasn't developed into the back we want him to be... but he clearly has the talent at his disposal. That was my only point.Your other point about not getting 1st downs... first of all, the Indy situation was a bad play call... not his fault. No one gets to the corner agaisnt Indy. Why do you try to turn the corner against a defense that is built on speed. You run up the middle in that situation. Secondly, I remember watching several games where he converted 3rd downs that he had no business getting. He always makes the first guy miss, and if he isn't too busy making other unnecessary cuts and direction changes, he makes something out of it. If he could stay healthy long enough to get some reps, he might make something of himself... but you and I both probably doubt that will happen. I just see him as one of the more talented guys on the team that will probably never amount to much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 Most valauable non-starter? I'd vote for Scott Kooistra. He's subbed, and done well, at every spot on the o-line except center. Could arguably start at RT for a number of teams. And all he cost the Bengals was a 7th round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.