Jump to content

Bengals to go after Dominic Rhodes?


palmmyjohnson

Recommended Posts

Thoughts?

Baseless speculation by Ludwig at the DDN?

They will probably sign someone. May as well stick with Watson, at least he knows the ropes. Look for the Bengals to spend a pick on an RB in April. I'm betting round 4...

Garrett Wolfe :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be a smart move to get Dominic as he is much better off the bench then starting.

Actually...no. Rhodes is nothing special off the bench. His best year as a backup was '04, in which he had 278 combined (rushing & receiving) yards. Watson's worst season as a backup was 332. He is a better kick returned than Watson, tho (career 23.6 avg.).

Plus, he is rarely injured, unlike Chris Perry.

"Rarely" is a bit strong. Rhodes has played a full 16 games just twice in his career. He's 71 for a possible 96 on that front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be a smart move to get Dominic as he is much better off the bench then starting.

Actually...no. Rhodes is nothing special off the bench. His best year as a backup was '04, in which he had 278 combined (rushing & receiving) yards. Watson's worst season as a backup was 332. He is a better kick returned than Watson, tho (career 23.6 avg.).

Plus, he is rarely injured, unlike Chris Perry.

"Rarely" is a bit strong. Rhodes has played a full 16 games just twice in his career. He's 71 for a possible 96 on that front.

And Chris Perry has yet to play 16 games for his entire career. Rhodes adds duribility and reliability that Perry has yet to show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Chris Perry has yet to play 16 games for his entire career. Rhodes adds duribility and reliability that Perry has yet to show.

True. But then again, so does Watson -- and I'm simply not convinced that Rhodes represents an upgrade over Kenny. And I think Rhodes will be significantly more expensive than Watson come March.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is another one where people are freaking dreaming. Rhodes is basically a co-starter now - why in God's name would he sign with a team where the lead back gets 90% of the carries?

He will get overpaid by a team who brings him in and gives him a chance to start. We're not going to get Rhodes like we're not going to get Schaub at QB (which I've heard here lately) - they're not going to sign here to sit the bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be a smart move to get Dominic as he is much better off the bench then starting.

Actually...no. Rhodes is nothing special off the bench. His best year as a backup was '04, in which he had 278 combined (rushing & receiving) yards. Watson's worst season as a backup was 332. He is a better kick returned than Watson, tho (career 23.6 avg.).

Plus, he is rarely injured, unlike Chris Perry.

"Rarely" is a bit strong. Rhodes has played a full 16 games just twice in his career. He's 71 for a possible 96 on that front.

And Chris Perry has yet to play 16 games for his entire career. Rhodes adds duribility and reliability that Perry has yet to show.

Rhodes had over 1,000 rushing yards in 2001 :huh: So where do you get the 278 yard combined figure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is another one where people are freaking dreaming. Rhodes is basically a co-starter now - why in God's name would he sign with a team where the lead back gets 90% of the carries?

He will get overpaid by a team who brings him in and gives him a chance to start. We're not going to get Rhodes like we're not going to get Schaub at QB (which I've heard here lately) - they're not going to sign here to sit the bench.

couldnt be more right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhodes had over 1,000 rushing yards in 2001 :huh: So where do you get the 278 yard combined figure?

We were discussing his off the bench performance. Rhodes was a starter (10 games) in 2001.

This is another one where people are freaking dreaming. Rhodes is basically a co-starter now - why in God's name would he sign with a team where the lead back gets 90% of the carries?

He will get overpaid by a team who brings him in and gives him a chance to start. We're not going to get Rhodes like we're not going to get Schaub at QB (which I've heard here lately) - they're not going to sign here to sit the bench.

Yup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhodes sure would cost the Bengals a lot more than what the Colts got Dede Dorsey for. :wacko:

Hard to believe the Bengals would bail on Perry now. Maybe this year he flourishes. Break a leg Chris. :cheers:

Bengals have never used Watson enough to warrant looking for someone else in any event. If they had to, at least he's got a track record like Rhodes as a starter.

Draftwise, the later the better and somebody's got a decent eye for rook free agents based on Dorsey. Justise Hairston would be a good power runner who can at least catch swing passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do understand Chris Perry is still a significant ? mark, as to his ability to come back 100% this season right? Right?

FA Rb's are overpaid and you can find a secondary guy in the draft or as an unsigned FA. Hell I would've been fine with Dorsey (although he ended up getting arrested in Indy as well from what I understand).

If you have a good line and good skill players, Rb's are a dime a dozen. Just look at Watson. Problem with Watson is that, like Perry, his warts begin to really show when you expose him too much/often.

Rhodes probably won't happen, and I'm fine with that. He wouldn't do as well behind the o-line here, which isn't as good or as consistent as the Colts.

Also, there's nothing to say that Rudi won't split close to 50/50 with whomever they bring in next year depending on how things shake out - if you remember Perry was getting full series before getting hurt yet again. Rhodes won't get a full-time gig elsewhere either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris Perry in the unemployment line.

This is why your a fan not a coach or a GM,if we cut TJ when fans were screaming he was injury prone (who was a 7th rounder not a 1st even) then this would be a preatty crappy team...we will not cut perry because it doesn't hurt the team to keep him around if need be they can Pup him so he won't take up a roster spot.

But if we get a healthy Perry 2x at the start of the season,I drool over the thought.

Hey everyone remember lamont and the contract he got being a career backup?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if we get a healthy Perry 2x at the start of the season I drool over the thought.

Agreed. Perry's current injury isn't one with much risk of repeating itself, and there's still a good chance he'll finally play a full season. He's the "tight end" everyone's been wanting, and he does an adequate job spelling Rudi.

Granted, there's an equally good chance he gets hurt again and the well-warranted Perry bitching continues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye,I just don't see how people would cut him though.

I'm all up for trying find a guy day 2 as a project incase he does get hurt again but why axe a 1st rounder when he still has promise?

i'm Excited about getting tab back alot too,him being able play back in a shotgun or TE or WR in a no huddle offense is just so sexy....all those shovel passes he caught his rookie season were hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is another one where people are freaking dreaming. Rhodes is basically a co-starter now - why in God's name would he sign with a team where the lead back gets 90% of the carries?

In 2006, Rudi carried the ball 341 times. Kenny Watson rushed 25 times. The team ran a combined 435 times. Rudi rushed 78% of the time.

Going back to 2005, Rudi rushed 337 times. Chris Perry rushed 61 times. The team ran a combined 459 times. Rudi rushed 73% of the time.

Not much difference.

However, let's examine the contributions of the #2 back.

In 2005, Chris Perry touched the ball 112 times (51 receptions, 61 rushes). In three seasons (four if you include his full-season injury in '05), Kenny Watson has touched the ball on offense (not talking about special teams) 99 times.

My only point is that, while many of you may love Kenny Watson, he doesn't represent anything significant to this offense other than a "blocking specialist". As much as I'll probably take the heat for it, Watson is a dime-a-dozen back. Just my .02...

This offense will, once again, be unstoppable once Chris Perry returns. I have no doubt. But like many of you, I do worry about the injury -- like I worry about Palmer's knee, Chad's hydration, T.J.'s back, etc.. does it justify anyone's argument that Watson is better or that we "need" Rhodes? Not really.

Kazkal is 100% right (and I was one that didn't think much of T.J.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...