Perry Will Surprise

[walshfan]

Never said that. In fact, I've stated I thought his contract's value -- which puts him in the top 11-15 paid backs range -- dead on to his abilities. I've never said he isn't worth what he's getting. I would simply prefer that he got it elsewhere.

Again, the team that drafted Perry didn't agree with your opinions about discarding Rudi. True, both you and the team agreed on Rudi's contract worth, but the people who know Perry best didn't have the faith in him that allowed them to consider letting Rudi leave. Got that? 'Cause it's important. When pushy came to shove Perry wasn't considered starting material. The team weighed ALL of the factors and felt it had to re-sign Rudi and they did so at a price you agree he's worth. So why all the bitching?

Oh yeah, your fantasy didn't pan out. Bummer.

It wasnt as much about having the faith in Perry as it was to diversify the offense.

Johnson runs north and south basically.. Perry catches the ball and has moves to the outside.. Whats wrong with having both since neither is Marshal Faulk in his prime.. I like the notion of playing either or both at times... Makes for a more intriguing offense this year....

[HoosierCat]

What bitching? I haven't said one bad word about Rudi, or about the decision to sign him, or about the price paid -- contrary to your assertions. Just setting the record straight, that's all.

So that wasn't you that said that you agreed Rudi was worth the contract he signed but wished he had signed it somewhere else?

Sure it was.

Sheesh, it's in this very thread.

Yep, it is.

Did I say he wasn't worth it, or that the Bengals were stupid to do it, or anything approaching complaining about the decision? Nope. It's a perfectly defensible call. It just isn't the way I would have played it. And whether it was the right move remains to be seen.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Where? Show me where I'm "dinging" Rudi? (You're welcome to try, too, kirk.) Sorry, but about the worst I can be accused of saying about Rudi is that he's a top-15 back. What I don't like is his price tag.

Hey! I thought I was in charge of "DINGING"!

[HairOnFire]

Did I say he wasn't worth it, or that the Bengals were stupid to do it, or anything approaching complaining about the decision? Nope.

Nope? Wadda ya mean nope? Well I say nope to your nope. I say you are definately whining and complaining about the decision to re-sign Rudi when you repeatedly opine that you wish he were playing for another team. That fact that you agree that Rudi is worth what his new contract pays and that the Bengals might be smart to re-sign him only serves to call into question why you felt it was a smarter play to let him go if he didn't agree to sign for less than he was worth.

[HairOnFire]

It wasnt as much about having the faith in Perry as it was to diversify the offense.

Johnson runs north and south basically.. Perry catches the ball and has moves to the outside.. Whats wrong with having both since neither is Marshal Faulk in his prime.. I like the notion of playing either or both at times... Makes for a more intriguing offense this year....

Yup. The two-fisted attack I've mentioned previously. Hammer and sword. Bacon and cheese. Thunderbolt and Lightfoot. Trouble is, at THIS point in time Perry can't stay healthy enough to be considered a reliable backup, let alone a potential starter.

[HoosierCat]

That fact that you agree that Rudi is worth what his new contract pays and that the Bengals might be smart to re-sign him only serves to call into question why you felt it was a smarter play to let him go if he didn't agree to sign for less than he was worth.

Whether he'd sign for less than he's worth doesn't have anything to do with it. Coming off 2004, the Bengals had two choices: carry on with their original plan to make Perry the starter, even though he was unable to get on the field, or level the franchise tag to hold on to Rudi.

The former plan had the advantage of allowing a large chunk of spending to be shifted from offense to defense, one of Marvin's stated goals. The risk was that Perry might not work out, forcing the team to scramble for a replacement.

The latter plan made a continued solid run game almost certain, but meant that any improvement in D would rely on rookies and untested youngsters like Askew. The Bengals selected this option; I would have taken the other.

[Ickeyshuffler]

Ok, i hate to get back into this rudi/perry/etc debate, but...got to. First of all, I'm not "bashing" rudi. I like the guy. He's a DECENT, productive back who will hit the hole hard and do well if his line opens the holes.

The reason myself and others don't feel as excited about him as some of you does not come from his production or numbers. Obviously he's "broken the single season rushing record." Yes, we know that. He racked up a nice season's worth of yardage. Problem is how he did it -- and the fact that if he could have bounced a few outside when the hole closed on 3rd and 1, or improvised and managed to get in the endzone on a few plays where he couldn't just run downhill, we might have been 10-6. It's not all about production, it's about variety, keeping the defense guessing, clutch performance, and the ability to take a game over if you're getting paid like he is. He simply doesn't scare anybody, and it's not hard to game plan for him because he hits the hole straight on and if its not there he hits it anyway. Credit our offensive line for much of his yardage totals last year.

Anyhow, with any luck we will get to see Perry do what he can do. I would love to see the dump off pass be an actual option, would love to see a broken play turn into a 12 yarder, and would love to see those 3rd and 1, 4th and inches plays not stuffed nearly every time. Rudi's a good back, he's just not what we might call a "playmaker." he's blue collar back who does what he's told/supposed to do and nothing more. He can't make anything happen on his own and he is not versatile enough to keep a defense guessing which is rather important nowadays. A straight downhill runner, if given the opportunity to carry the ball as many times as he did, is likely to rack up many yards a la last season. But if that's all he can do, 8-8 or worse appears likely with our defense (not saying that rudi was the reason we went 8-8 last year, but he COULD have won a few more for us if he wasn't so damn predictable and far from clutch).

[HairOnFire]

Coming off 2004, the Bengals had two choices: carry on with their original plan to make Perry the starter, even though he was unable to get on the field, or level the franchise tag to hold on to Rudi.

What is this original plan of which you speak? Seems to me Marvin and company said immediately after drafting Perry that the move didn't impact their plans for Rudi at all. Lots of Bengal fans didn't believe them of course...we're a funny bunch that way...but in hindsight the addition of Perry didn't impact the Bengals desire to retain Rudi despite a greater than expected cost. Sure, that later move could be explained as a reaction to Perry being injured OR it could simply be a result of the Bengals doing exactly what they said they were doing BEFORE Perry was dinged.

[Pause]

Yeah, I know it's crazy to think this way, but maybe the Bengals weren't lying. Maybe they were dead serious about making the running back position one of strength, versatility, and depth.

[Pause]

If true, and it is...then none of the Bengals gameday problems or fan frustrations deserve to be laid at the churning feet of Rudi Johnson. Instead, they fall squarely at the inactive feet of one Chris Perry. Simply put, he's not getting the job done and because he has an injury excuse to lean upon the frustration for any failures in the Bengals rushing attack are misdirected towards the player who is doing his job splendidly.

Go figure, huh?

[HairOnFire]

The latter plan made a continued solid run game almost certain, but meant that any improvement in D would rely on rookies and untested youngsters like Askew.

And there it is.

Just think about it for a moment. Let it sink in. Wallow in the promise of the move actually made instead of endlessly dreaming of the potential of deals never seriously considered.

The near certainty of a solid running game for years and years to come.

Yup, I say give that man a peanut 'cause he nailed it.

[HairOnFire]

Obviously he's "broken the single season rushing record." Yes, we know that. He racked up a nice season's worth of yardage. Problem is how he did it -- and the fact that if he could have bounced a few outside when the hole closed on 3rd and 1, or improvised and managed to get in the endzone on a few plays where he couldn't just run downhill....

This is the point of our story where Old Schooler usually pops in and produces a page or two of stats that PROVE how silly your rant is.....followed immediately by a DPM post complaining about how stats mean nothing, something that is especially true if your name is Chris Perry.

Round and round and round we go.

[Bgal]

Ugh, I know this is a message board and debates are the name of the game but good lord.

The contract is done and there was no way around it unless we started the season with a kid that only has potential. So hell, lets just look towards the future and be grateful we have a 1st round pick that can bust and mean nothing to us or he can light things up and help us win a few games.

We could be like Cleveland and have a running back holding out and last year's pick pretending to be a stunt double.

[DontPushMe]

The latter plan made a continued solid run game almost certain, but meant that any improvement in D would rely on rookies and untested youngsters like Askew.

And there it is.

Just think about it for a moment. Let it sink in. Wallow in the promise of the move actually made instead of endlessly dreaming of the potential of deals never seriously considered.

The near certainty of a solid running game for years and years to come.

Yup, I say give that man a peanut 'cause he nailed it.

You are trying to act like the running game has been a huge problem for us. Think back, when was the last time we seriously struggled with the running game? This team has feilded 2-14 and 4-12 teams over the past 14 years, but still, the run game has always been there.

Another thing id like to point out is, RJ's contract is frontloaded, in case you guys didnt notice, and the reason is, they still dont consider him to be the long term answer. When Chris Perry shows hes the better player (something i have no doubt about), RJ will be traded. Thats why his cap hit is like 6m this year.

[schweinhart]

if hes healthy he doesnt have to beat watson out at all. lewis will give him a chance. he'll just have to perform to stay ahead of him.

It will be just like last year when Perry was 39-129 for a 3.3 avg in pre-season including 17 carries in the pre-season final of which 10 of those carries came in 1 drive and 14 were in the 3rd quarter.

I don't remember exactly when Perry came up lame but it sure seems like it would've been during or after the last pre-season game cause he was not active for the regular season opener and did not play in the next 2 games before finally seeing action vs. Pittsburgh.

At the very least, Perry looked like he was being groomed to be the back Watson was during the regular season plus being tested as a workhorse.

Not doubt Perry will get his chance again, but this will be the last year Watson will be a Bengal and he's got more on the line than Perry. They are competing for the same playing time and Watson has shown his reliability except for 1 crucial fumble last year. Perry does not have to have a key contributing role this year since he's under contract for 5 more yrs, but if he does get the chance he should have to earn it. I don't think he's better than Watson yet but pre-season will start to tell, like it did last year.

[BengalszoneBilly]

Another thing id like to point out is, RJ's contract is frontloaded, in case you guys didnt notice, and the reason is, they still dont consider him to be the long term answer. When Chris Perry shows hes the better player (something i have no doubt about), RJ will be traded. Thats why his cap hit is like 6m this year.

Now let me get this straight and I theoretically go along with this fantasy of yours that the Bengals don't plan on using him more than another year or two. Tops?

Then you claim the Bengals management, being the all around swell and generous guy's we've come to know them to be... intentionally "front-loaded" (Which I take to mean that most of the $$$ in Rudi's contract is to be paid early, and not in the final years?) rudi's contract when they have no intention of keeping him through the latter part of it?

Dude!! Do you know anything about Mike Brown? He's stingy with money, as in "Tight." In fact, before Marvin came here, he used to be sooo tight, that if you could stuff a piece of coal up his ass, he'd turn it into a diamond in a week!

So unless I'm way off in my understanding of front versus back loading, (*and if I am, someone straighten my dumb ass out please!) of contract money...

There simply ain't no WAY Mike Brown would do something like that!! If Cincinnati did indeed have no intention of retaining beyond another year or two the services of Mr Rudi "All Time Bengals Season Rushing Record Holder" Johnson, he'd have BACK-LOADED Rudi's money so Rudi would have gotten less of it, and Mike would have kept more!!

[HoosierCat]

What is this original plan of which you speak? Seems to me Marvin and company said immediately after drafting Perry that the move didn't impact their plans for Rudi at all.

And if they'd already decided that they preferred not to spend the money it would take to retain a successful Rudi, and so drafted Perry, then that statement would be perfectly true, wouldn't it? Marvin has repeatedly stated he wants to move spending from the offensive to the defensive side of the ball, saying the low spending on defense is the source of our chronic defensive struggles. So after Rudi effectively replaces Dillon, how do the Bengals respond? Well, they slap the top RFA tender on him, decline to enter long-term negotiations, and draft an RB in the first round. Now, is that more suggestive of a long-term committment to keep Rudi...or plans to let him go or trade him if at all possible?

The near certainty of a solid running game for years and years to come.

Accompanied by the equal-near-certaintty of little, if any, immediate improvement on defense. Low risk...but low reward.

[Kirkendall]

PTI will return in just a moment.

[HairOnFire]

Think back, when was the last time we seriously struggled with the running game?

How about anytime someone claimed that Corey Dillon was going to "run angry"?

[HairOnFire]

What is this original plan of which you speak? Seems to me Marvin and company said immediately after drafting Perry that the move didn't impact their plans for Rudi at all.

And if they'd already decided that they preferred not to spend the money it would take to retain a successful Rudi, and so drafted Perry, then that statement would be perfectly true, wouldn't it?

Joisey, I think I've finally figured out your problem. You're constantly giving equal or greater weight to things NOT said as you do the actual statements made by Lewis and his staff. In this example you're ignoring comments Lewis made in direct response to questions about the Perry pick and it's possible impact on Rudi in favor of broad generalities Lewis said at another time. That's pie-eyed.

That said, have you heard the rumor that the only reason the Bengals signed Rudi is to trade him the moment Chris Perry can stop his groin from bubbling like a soup on high boil? Yeah, it's true! And get this, Marvin Lewis signed off on the plan because he's not going to be here when it happens. Rumor has it that he's out the door the moment the team has a winning record! And the Bengals will have a winning record....right after they switch to the 3-4.

It's all true!!!!

[DontPushMe]

Another thing id like to point out is, RJ's contract is frontloaded, in case you guys didnt notice, and the reason is, they still dont consider him to be the long term answer. When Chris Perry shows hes the better player (something i have no doubt about), RJ will be traded. Thats why his cap hit is like 6m this year.

Now let me get this straight and I theoretically go along with this fantasy of yours that the Bengals don't plan on using him more than another year or two. Tops?

Then you claim the Bengals management, being the all around swell and generous guy's we've come to know them to be... intentionally "front-loaded" (Which I take to mean that most of the $$$ in Rudi's contract is to be paid early, and not in the final years?) rudi's contract when they have no intention of keeping him through the latter part of it?

Dude!! Do you know anything about Mike Brown? He's stingy with money, as in "Tight." In fact, before Marvin came here, he used to be sooo tight, that if you could stuff a piece of coal up his ass, he'd turn it into a diamond in a week!

So unless I'm way off in my understanding of front versus back loading, (*and if I am, someone straighten my dumb ass out please!) of contract money...

There simply ain't no WAY Mike Brown would do something like that!! If Cincinnati did indeed have no intention of retaining beyond another year or two the services of Mr Rudi "All Time Bengals Season Rushing Record Holder" Johnson, he'd have BACK-LOADED Rudi's money so Rudi would have gotten less of it, and Mike would have kept more!!

Salaries are usually backloaded so the guy can be cut in the later years of the deal. From what i hear, the SIGNING BONUS, which will have to be paid regaurdless, is frontloaded. Meaning after this year we can cut or trade him with less of a cap hit.

How about anytime someone claimed that Corey Dillon was going to "run angry"?

Well i was talking about by season. Because if we were going game by game, we struggled with the run at least 10 times last year in games when RJ was showing his true colors.

[HoosierCat]

Joisey, I think I've finally figured out your problem. You're constantly giving equal or greater weight to things NOT said as you do the actual statements made by Lewis and his staff.

Nope. I just "see better than I hear." At least when it comes to matters of personnel -- players and coaches -- Marvin has shown no hesitation to lie through his teeth. Did you believe him last year when he said he had complete confidence in Tony Williams -- after spending half the year trying to sign Sapp and then Gardener to replace him? Heck, to this day he still denies there was ever any deal for Darryl in place, despite the widespread media reports and the fact the guy came to town and took (and failed) a physical.

That's no surprise, of course. What would anyone expect him to say? "Well, yeah, Tony sucks but we couldn't get anyone in so we'll just have to muddle through."?

This year, he tells the media that he expects his coaching staff to return intact in 2005 -- and then the very next day boots Frazier.

After they brought in Sharper, and drafted Pollack, did anyone believe continued assertions that Kevin Hardy was still in the mix?

So yeah...when they decline to enter into talks for a long-term deal and draft an RB in the first round, I take any talk about Rudi being in the long-term plan with a big freakin' grain of salt.

[Kirkendall]

So yeah...when they decline to enter into talks for a long-term deal and draft an RB in the first round, I take any talk about Rudi being in the long-term plan with a big freakin' grain of salt.

Yeap yeap yeap. Hobson even mentions how closed the front office, with Marvin, is when it comes to planning (i.e draft, FA, personnel in general). Marvin is very diplomatic and very mindful of what he says and opts to just steer clear from anything controversial. I can't blame him though. That's just the nature of the media-beast. Side on caution.

[HairOnFire]

So yeah...when they decline to enter into talks for a long-term deal and draft an RB in the first round, I take any talk about Rudi being in the long-term plan with a big freakin' grain of salt.

Fair enough, but wouldn't you agree that your habit of concentrating on the blank spaces that appear between the lines...while ignoring the actual comments made...leaves you predisposed to creating odd fantasy scenarios that don't come true?

Moving on, are you claiming now that Rudi isn't in the Bengals long-term plans?

[HairOnFire]

How about anytime someone claimed that Corey Dillon was going to "run angry"?

Well i was talking about by season. Because if we were going game by game, we struggled with the run at least 10 times last year in games when RJ was showing his true colors.

Whahhh, so now you don't want to talk about Dillon?

The one factor that has remained a constant in the Bengals running game, regardless of who is the starter, is a consistent habit of inconsistency. In fact, Dillon's reputation as a Bengal was built on the occasional spectacular game surrounded by week after week after week of mediocre performances. Knowing that, why should anyone expect more of Rudi when he's running behind the same blockers and playing within the same offensive scheme as Dillon once did?

[HoosierCat]

Hobson even mentions how closed the front office, with Marvin, is when it comes to planning (i.e draft, FA, personnel in general).

Yup. And for the record that doesn't bother me. Most well-run teams tend to be circumspect, diplomatic, and happily lie outright at times. IMHO, it's actually a sign of improvement on the Bengals' part.

Hair:

Fair enough, but wouldn't you agree that your habit of concentrating on the blank spaces that appear between the lines...while ignoring the actual comments made...leaves you predisposed to creating odd fantasy scenarios that don't come true?

Well, those "blank space" only appear as a result of their words and actions not meeting up. When they say player X is an important player they want to build around and then proceceed to ink him to a long term contract or extension -- as they did with Chad Johnson and Duane Clemons, for example -- then there's nothing to wonder about. When they say that and then draft the guy's potential replacement in the first round...ya gotta wonder.

Moving on, are you claiming now that Rudi isn't in the Bengals long-term plans?

Nah, I'll let DPM make that argument. I haven't seen anything to the effect that Rudi's contract is "front-loaded." If it's the usual kind of deal the Bengals do, then the money is spread out fairly evenly over the length of the contract. So the cap alone dictates that he's now in their long-term plans, whether he ever plays another down or not.

[HairOnFire]

Moving on, are you claiming now that Rudi isn't in the Bengals long-term plans?

Nah, I'll let DPM make that argument. I haven't seen anything to the effect that Rudi's contract is "front-loaded." If it's the usual kind of deal the Bengals do, then the money is spread out fairly evenly over the length of the contract. So the cap alone dictates that he's now in their long-term plans, whether he ever plays another down or not.

Oh, I see. So NOW it's safe to say that Rudi is part of the Bengals long-term plans, but not earlier when the Bengals were simply saying it that very thing or later when they were taking the required actions to ensure it.