Chris Perry

[San Antonio Bengal]

This may be a silly question, but execuse my lack of knowledge of sports medicine. How long does an abdominal strain last?! He's been out for a month now and it just seems a bit odd to be out that long for an abdominal strain. Sure, I've never played pro sports, but I've never had any strain last that long. If it were more of a tear I could understand, but just a strain? Someone care to enlighten me as to why it's taking him so long to heal up?

[bengalboomer7]

basically, it's because of where it is, not how bad it is. To move at all, you have to move the trunk of your body, so anyway he moves, he;s putting pressure on that bad ab, restricting his moves. If you neede more detail, please ask

[Kirkendall]

I think there's more to it than just injury for Perry.

[HoosierCat]

FWIW, during the broadcast Sunday, Lap said that he'd talked to Perry pre-game when he'd come out and tried to run a little. Apparently the strain is in his lower abs, below the belly button, and just kills his ability to run. And if it is that low, that puts the strain at or near the weakest portion of the ab muscle, meaning any further aggravation could result in an outright tear (a hernia) which would require surgery and mean he would join the rest of the ward on IR.

[San Antonio Bengal]

That's a good explanation. I was thinking of the upper abdominals rather than the lower. Straining your upper abs hurts, but I couldn't imagine what a lower ab strain would feel like.

[Kirkendall]

Thanks for the note Joisey.

So my next question is, now what? I hate to sound like a jerk, but his contributions have been very limited, even when he was healthy promoting the question, "was Perry drafted to strong-arm Rudi to signing?"

Very few people here believe Perry was a good draft pick for the first selection and I'm still not convinced of the attitude of drafting the best player available is a good one; I tend to lean towards the draft a position need. While anyone can run through a draft site and cite examples of drafting the best player rather than need, it doesn't always apply to each team's yearly dynamics of the foundation which almost flawlessly disrupts a team's development when drafting other than a need (possible future Perry citation?)

What are your guy's thoughts?

[jamesbrooks21]

I think that everyone is making too big a deal out of this Perry situation. Some people have to throw up the conspiracy theory. Damn, the guy is f**king hurt---it is not some big cover up. Think about the injury and what type of back he is. And I also do not believe he was drafted just to have leverage against Rudi. I mean think about it, with the value of draft picks nowadays that their is only seven, why would we waste a 1st Round pick again a 1st Round pick just to use against Rudi. Marvin Lewis is going to draft the best player available and Chris Perry had nothing to do with Rudi Johnson.

[Kirkendall]

And I also do not believe he was drafted just to have leverage against Rudi.  I mean think about it, with the value of draft picks nowadays that their is only seven, why would we waste a 1st Round pick again a 1st Round pick just to use against Rudi.

OK, with all that said, why did we draft Perry? We already had Rudi, didn't we? But no one has put together a competent argument about drafting Perry. Same applies to you. Of course this discussion is mute if Perry did something. But when he was healthier, wasn't he criticized by Marvin on something basic as BLOCKING in the backfield? Didn't he learn this in college? Just an observation...

Damn, the guy is f**king hurt

Yes, he is. Great point.

Sorry, I'm just not on board with Perry right now. I wasn't when we drafted him and I wasn't high on him when he was with Michigan.

[Bobcat Bengal]

Uhm, when was he WITH us to begin with?

For all of two plays?

[jamesbrooks21]

OK, with all that said, why did we draft Perry?  We already had Rudi, didn't we?  But no one has put together a competent argument about drafting Perry.  Same applies to you.  Of course this discussion is mute if Perry did something.  But when he was healthier, wasn't he criticized by Marvin on something basic as BLOCKING in the backfield?  Didn't he learn this in college?  Just an observation...

Sorry, I'm just not on board with Perry right now.  I wasn't when we drafted him and I wasn't high on him when he was with Michigan.

Would you say that Perry and Rudi are the same type of backs? No, they aren't. That was one of the main reasons he was drafted - so that he could compliment Rudi and spell him at times. Perry is shifty, and catches the ball very well out of the backfield. Marvin's thinking was that he was the best all-around back in the draft. That's why he was drafted not for some negotiating power. I'm on board with him because Marvin's draft picks have worked out pretty well. Oh, and I'm sure the blocking schemes at Michigan and the ones in the NFL are just a tad bit different.

[Kirkendall]

I would agree with, Rudi will cost too much in FA next year so why not groom next years (and years after that) running back now with the Carson-agenda (sit one year, play the next)? What are your thoughts on that scenario?

Oh, and I'm sure the blocking schemes at Michigan and the ones in the NFL are just a tad bit different.

Very true, but why then is Perry having problems with the blocking scheme? Is it a lack of intelligent capacity? Slow reaction time to blitzes? And doesn't Michigan put out poor running backs in the first place? Why is this? This is why I'm not sold on Perry just yet.

[jamesbrooks21]

Well I agree in good Big Ten running backs altogether, not just Michigan backs, are few and far between.

I would agree with, Rudi will cost too much in FA next year so why not groom next years (and years after that) running back now with the Carson-agenda (sit one year, play the next)? What are your thoughts on that scenario?

I could see that to an extent but I believe that if he was healthy he would see some snaps. Do you think we have no chance of re-signing Rudi? Marvin has shown that he prefers to bring in HIS players. Don't know but I really don't think they would just draft Perry to use him against Rudi. Just my opinion though.

Very true, but why then is Perry having problems with the blocking scheme? Is it a lack of intelligent capacity? Slow reaction time to blitzes? And doesn't Michigan put out poor running backs in the first place? Why is this? This is why I'm not sold on Perry just yet.

I think it's just inexperience.

[chrishcovga]

Injury or no Injury , The Cincinnati Bengals were in no position after posting a surprising 8-8 record last year to spend a 1st round pick on a " backup " !!

- You'd have to be Ray Charles ( which implies both blind and dead ) to not see Mike Browns' attempt to force a Rudi Johnson signing.

-- Good Teams are good for several reasons, and the most important and often overlooked is Ownership and Management! 13 years of " What the F*CK ? " means MB has no business interfering with Marvin and Co. on draft day!

** I've said it before and I'll say it again... I had no problem with us picking a running back to replace Corey Dillon with the first round pick. But there is a reason why teams go through interview after interview and test after test with these players before the draft. And no one on this little planet is gonna convince me that our " War - Room " honestly thought Chris Perry was the # 1 overall player in the draft let alone a better running back than Steven Jackson from Oregon.

As it stands right now, Steven Jackson is averaging more than 5 yards a carry. He has over 300 yards rushing as a backup though 9 games.He's even returned kicks as well...?? He sounds more like " James Brooks " than the 'pipe-dream we were all fed last April.

* Let's just play the " tradition " card shall we..??? Haven't we learned by now about drafting running backs from the big 10 ..??? Archie Griffin, Ki Jana Carter, and now you can add Chris Perry's name to the

Loooonnnnnnngggggg list of bad Michigan runningbacks !

I agree with Kirk, the purpose of the Draft is to draft for NEED. To get the best player available at a Need Spot, and if not possible, trade down or grab the best player available , and as I recall , Chris Perry wasn't even considered the second best running back Kevin Jones was!

[jamesbrooks21]

- You'd have to be Ray Charles ( which implies both blind and dead ) to not see Mike Browns' attempt to force a Rudi Johnson signing.

No way. This is who our coaching staff targeted before the draft. It had nothing to do with Rudi, Marvin said this himself.

I agree with Kirk, the purpose of the Draft is to draft for NEED. To get the best player available at a Need Spot, and if not possible, trade down or grab the best player available , and as I recall , Chris Perry wasn't even considered the second best running back Kevin Jones was!

I agree, somewhat. You can't always draft best player available. Obviously, if we had the first pick this year and couldn't deal it we wouldn't have selected Eli Manning. But, drafting need spots has screwed the Bengals more often than not because it ended with them "reaching" on many prospects. There has to be a happy medium.

* Let's just play the " tradition " card shall we..??? Haven't we learned by now about drafting running backs from the big 10 ..??? Archie Griffin, Ki Jana Carter, and now you can add Chris Perry's name to the

Loooonnnnnnngggggg list of bad Michigan runningbacks !

You're giving up on him already huh?

[chrishcovga]

It's not even a question of giving up on him. Tyrone Wheatley turned out to be a " solid " pro , but that's not what we needed or wanted out of Chris Perry now is it..??

- And if you're going to " be-lie-eve " that our coaching staff targeted Perry before the draft, then i'll ask you this question....

IF we don't make the trade for Deltha O'Neal and move down from 17, do you honestly think we would have drafted Perry over , Wilfork, Udeze, W. Smith, D.J. Williams, Vernon Carey..??? etcetera... etcetera.... etcetera...???

No we wouldn't , that's why they call it B.S.... It's a form of idealogy that is only fed to morons!

And let's address the " reach " thinking.

1. Ki Jana wasn't a reach, he was the top runningback in the draft of '95, who's career got shortened by a series of injuries, and the rise of Corey Dillon.

2. David Klingler wasn't a reach - he was one of the top rated Quarterbacks, but our coaching staff wanted Troy Vincent, and Mike Brown wanted Klingler nuff said.

3. Akili Smith wasn't a reach - he was a gamble. One year of successful play at the QB position does not equivalate to the # 3rd overall spot. Let alone the biggest mistake of that draft wasn't taking Akili, it was not taking the Deal from Mike Ditka and his offer of 10 ( count them again in your head out loud ) TEN draft picks he offered to get Ricky " Weed " Williams.

4. Big Daddy Wilkinson - wasn't a reach - but he wasn't a need !! We needed a running back because our starting running back for the 1993 season was .. Derrick Fenner.?? It was said at the draft right after Cincy' picked Big Daddy, that Cincinnati will forever be remembered as the team that passed on Marshall Faulk, and guess who made that call..??

I hope i've made my point here... and as a Bengal fan, I hope I'm wrong about Perry, but there's this old saying...

" The Problem with History is that it DOES repeat itself " !

[BengalsMan3203]

I'm not a huge Chris Perry Fan. But I am a HUGE OSU.

And, I watched last years OSU/Michigan and the Boy Ran all over the number 1 rated D in the land. NO Doubt he has some talent in the back field. NO DOUBT.

Marvin has something planned, Just with his injury the plan you cannot see.

We have our pounding back in Rudi. He is the guy you run between the tackles and let him go pounding the ball. Great Hands, Great Strength, Great Legs.

Now we need a back that can come in and show a change of pace. One that can bounce it outside and break a run. One that will juke the hell out of you with a side step. A Quick back, Great Hands. A good 3rd down back. Thats Perry.

If Perry wasn't hurt i'd go on a guess to say that he'd be used as Davenport is used in G.B. Between the 40's. Sherman likes to bring Davenport in between the 40's to give Green a rest before they hit the red zone. I like that idea. And I think u'd see more of it if Perry was healthy. But he isn't.

[Barbarian]

2. David Klingler wasn't a reach - he was one of the top rated Quarterbacks, but our coaching staff wanted Troy Vincent, and Mike Brown wanted Klingler nuff said.

3. Akili Smith wasn't a reach - he was a gamble. One year of successful play at the QB position does not equivalate to the # 3rd overall spot. Let alone the biggest mistake of that draft wasn't taking Akili, it was not taking the Deal from Mike Ditka and his offer of 10 ( count them again in your head out loud ) TEN draft picks he offered to get Ricky " Weed " Williams.

I think I'm going to have to disagree on these 2. David Klingon was the biggest system QB in the 1990s. Yes, he gets the nod over Danny Wuerffel. We all know what happens to system QBs. They don't do very well in the NFL.

Akili Smith was a definite reach. You even said so yourself in this statement:

One year of successful play at the QB position does not equivalate to the # 3rd overall spot.

Yes, and that's defined as a "reach". Also, someone who plays only 10 decent games in their senior season at collegiate level doesn't warrant a #3 pick in the entire draft.

Dude, just admit you work for Mike Brown and this is some propaganda ploy. Are you Jeff Slobson in hiding????

[chrishcovga]

Damn Barb, you're still alive..!!! Wow , i figured you would have died by now from a severe case of carpal tunnel syndrome from playing Dungeons and Dragons in your mom's basement !!!

But all seriousness - A reach is defined as a player not " considered " to be an elite prospect, taken rounds ahead of " so - called " draft rating.

- I.E. - Madieu Williams - considered a 3rd rounder , we took in the second round, and that reach was worth it.

ex.# 2 - Landon Johnson and Caleb Miller, late round prospects that we took in round 3, so far the word is still out on them, but they look promising!

- That's why i said Akili Smith was a " GAMBLE " and not a reach. If you compared the pro-days of Donovan McNabb, Tim Couch, and Akili Smith, the only player to have WOWED the scouts and teams that day all three worked out together was Smith. - As a matter of fact, if you've ever seen the documentary of the '99 draft, there wasn't a coach there that wasn't impressed with Smith.

- But like I said, the drafting of Akili wasn't the mistake, not taking the 10 picks Mike Ditka and his Saints offered to get Ricky Williams was the mistake.

Here's how the picks broke down.

Saints get our # 3 overall in the '99 draft.

Bengals get

# 1. 1st ( 13th overall ) , 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th in 99 draft.

# 2. 1st and 3rd in 2000 draft.

# 3. 1st in 2001 draft.

# 4. 2nd in 2002 draft.

- Bruce Coslet didn't even want Smith. He wanted to make the deal, but Mike Brown took Smith. nuff said.

[HoosierCat]

-- Good Teams are good for several reasons, and the most important and often overlooked is Ownership and Management! 13 years of " What the F*CK ? " means MB has no business interfering with Marvin and Co. on draft day!

Still haven't gotten over Perry, huh, chrish? Sorry, but given the way the rest of the draft class is coming along, I'm quite comfortable with a "wait and see" attitude on Perry.

Two thoughts: first, has anyone been truly impressed by the combination of Rudi & Watson? Overall they've been a pretty average team. From that angle, drafting Perry and not rushing to resign Rudi (assuming Rudi could have been resigned for a reasonable amount) looks like a good move.

Second, does anyone really think that if we'd gotten Wilfork or Udeze or Odom or [insert you pet DT/DE here] that we would be in a position to challenge Pitt for the division? And let's not forget that to get many of these coveted lovelies, we would have had to stay at 17, and thus not gotten O'Neal, who has done wonders for our CB spot.

[The_Next_Big_Thing]

Even at 17, Udeze, Wilfork, Odom, etc. were projected to be gone. We were projected to take Chris Gamble, because our NEED was at cornerback. We covered our need at cornerback by dropping down and getting Deltha. At that point, we could have taken Jackson. Marvin liked Perry more than Jackson, so we got Geathers and Perry instead of Jackson.

I like that trade off. Perry is still unknown, but Geathers was worth the trade down.

Give peace (and Perry) a chance! We'll see what he does next season.

[Jonboat]

I don't think Perry was drafted for leverage but maybe for insurance, if we lose Rudi to FA who do we have to replace him if we didn't get Perry? As far as need, we did draft D-lineman RG, MA , Moore is looking very good plus we tried for Sapp, & thought we could get Gardener but ,we mistakenly thought he was healthy! I think we just have to wait till he gets healthy to see how he works out but ,Marvin is pretty high on him & judging how the other Rookies are playing so far, I have to believe that Marvin knows what he's doing by taking him so high in the draft! Time will tell if he can live up to his potential or not. GO BENGALS!!! Jonboat

[San Antonio Bengal]

You can never evaluate how good a draft was until at least a year or two later. And every team has some draft busts along with some gems. Let's give Perry some time to heal up and show us what he can do. If he's a bust on the playing field, the criticism is valid, but he hasn't had that chance yet. Judge him on what he does on the field when he has the opportunity, not on your philosophies on what should have happened in the draft.

[jamesbrooks21]

Well, we can argue who is behind the drafting of Perry all day long. But one thing is for sure IF they did draft him to use against Rudi then they wasted a very valuable pick for absolutley nothing. And I just don't think they did that. You know how Lewis likes the well-rounded versatile players that do many things good. Perry fits this mold and I be-LIE-ve him when he says thats who they wanted.

[Kirkendall]

You can never evaluate how good a draft was until at least a year or two later.

No doubt SA, it's always fun to debate stuff like this because it's the debate of limited experience versus potential. Those debates never die out because it's two extremes with hypothetical, but always fun to see what everyone things; hence why I proposed the question.

[San Antonio Bengal]

Don't get me wrong. The debating is fun. And it's what football fans are meant to do! Nevertheless, I like the debates that have a little more substance behind them rather than being purely hypothetical. If Perry had a game or two under his belt, this debate would be much more interesting and there would be actual plays which we could scrutinize.

I will add this... after seeing how some of the other picks of the draft are turning out, I have confidence in Marvin and Co. until they give me reason to not have confidence in them. Really, to take a team like the Bengals and go 8 - 8 in the first season and be sitting at 4 - 5 in the second season is absolutely amazing! Would anyone have believed me if I told them a couple years ago that the Bengals were going to go on a 12 - 13 streak!

(Okay, okay, 12 - 13 is not quite a streak, but for this organization, it's the closest thing we have! )