Packers won’t cut down on Cedric Benson’s carries

Getty Images

Green Bay running back Cedric Benson is only averaging 3.6 yards a carry this season, but that doesn’t make the Packers’ coaches think they should give him the ball less. If anything, they think they should give him the ball more.

Packers offensive coordinator Tom Clements said he thinks Benson will play better with more opportunities, and more opportunities are what the Packers want to give him.

“He’s a workhorse and when he touches the ball, the more he touches it, the better he gets,” Clements said of Benson, via the Green Bay Press-Gazette.

Behind Benson on the Packers’ running back depth chart are Alex Green, who has two carries this season, and James Starks and Brandon Saine, who have zero carries. Clements made clear that giving the backups more opportunities is a lower priority than feeding Benson.

“We’d like to work those other guys in there if the opportunity presents itself but you try to get [Benson] the ball to get him going,” Clements said.

The Packers aren’t running the ball quite as much this season as they did last season, mostly because they aren’t protecting leads as much this season as they were last season. But as long as Benson is healthy, he’ll be the one carrying the ball in Green Bay.

40 responses to “Packers won’t cut down on Cedric Benson’s carries

  1. Ced Benson is underrated, imo, because he’s not flashy. He’s a hit-you-in-the-mouth workhorse who can also catch the ball out of the backfield. With Jennings potentially sidelined and Finley under-performing, I think Green Bay is wise to ask Benson to shoulder a heavy offensive load for the team.

    @BenMarkus1985

  2. How does Ted Thompson know which guys to pull the trigger on and which guys to let pass? Guy’s a genius.

  3. keep him coming, as long as McCarthy keeps running Benson to open up down field (since everyone and their mom knows that you stop our offense you drop 2 safeties) instead of being stubborn and throwing the ball all the time like the first half of the seahawks game, this offense will continue to grow.

  4. It was the Saints D but I thought he looked outstanding on Sunday. The only game he looked bad in was week 1 against the 49ers. He’s definitely a huge upgrade over Ryan Grant who got stuffed in the backfield way more.

    That said hope they mix in Green, Starks and Cobb coming out of the backfield.

  5. Meanwhile Benson’s roommate has been put on alert in the case they do cut down on his carries.

  6. I like Benson. He’s not a world-beater, but to trot out an old cliche, he runs through contact and “falls forward”. Seems like a little thing, but this is something the Packers have not had in an RB since Ahman Green.

    Since Green, the bar hasn’t been set very high for RB’s in Green Bay. By that standard, I’ll take “hit immediately for a gain of 2” vs. “hit immediately for a gain of zero” any time.

  7. I hate the packers. But Benson was a great pick up for them. He is underrated. Every down back. Much respect.

  8. In this particular case it makes sense. Benson is an older back they picked for nothing. He is clearly the only decent back they have so might as well run him and get every last bit left.

  9. dino2997 says:Oct 2, 2012 2:28 PM

    Packer opponents will be very happy to see Cedric Benson have plenty of carries.
    _______________

    Yeah, because that will most likely mean the Packers are trying to eat up clock in the 4th quarter.

  10. Packers are 2-0 when Benson gets 18 or more carries. In the Seattle loss, Benson had 2 carries in the first half and Packer were down 0-7. In the second half, before the “Fail Mary”, Benson had 15 carries and the Packers added a TD, and 2 field goals to going ahead 12-7 (missed 2pt conv.). I think Pack Offense if figuring out that running the ball is good thing.

  11. He is what they need, he has a similar build to former Packer Dorsey Levens that downhill runner they need to at least ensure defenses respect the run

  12. Did you ppl watch Benson in Cincinnati?? he was a bum who whined about his lack of carries and when he was given the chance he fumbled a lot…

  13. Still some tread left on the tires, but I don’t get why the Packers would want to make him a focal point…

  14. I think most Packer fans would agree that 3.6 YPC is an outstanding average compared to what we’ve seen since Ahman Green ran out of gas.

  15. cleverbob says: Oct 2, 2012 3:13 PM

    Still some tread left on the tires, but I don’t get why the Packers would want to make him a focal point…

    ————————-

    He’s getting an average of 16 carries a game, and they are talking about not cutting into his carries, MAYBE giving him more.

    That’s not really a “focal point”. That’s called “a vague semblance of a running game.” Which is I think all they are shooting for.

  16. Good for Ced, He was the best option out there for GB. But he is not good in short yardage and is better when he is the only one getting carries. He wasn’t a bum in Cincy just grumpy about sharing carries. That’s why he isn’t here

  17. killface4prez says:
    Oct 2, 2012 3:27 PM

    cleverbob says: Oct 2, 2012 3:13 PM

    Still some tread left on the tires, but I don’t get why the Packers would want to make him a focal point…

    ————————-

    He’s getting an average of 16 carries a game, and they are talking about not cutting into his carries, MAYBE giving him more.

    That’s not really a “focal point”. That’s called “a vague semblance of a running game.” Which is I think all they are shooting for.
    ==============================

    Thanks for clarifying. In my defense I live in Philly, so anything over 10 called running plays is pretty extreme from my perspective.

  18. jonny42671 says:
    Oct 2, 2012 4:12 PM
    Is it the referees fault??
    —————————————–

    If you say so.

  19. thepvyharvin says:
    Oct 2, 2012 4:17 PM
    Keep feeding him,,,,signed Vikings Defense

    ——————

    No thanks Pervy, Rodgers and the Packers receivers have too much fun making your secondary look terrible. Admittedly, that’s not that hard to do but it sure is fun to watch.

  20. Much like Raiders Fans believe they have Carson Palmer circa 2005, I see a lot of people believing the Packers have Cedric Benson circa 2009. Ced had one good year with the Bengals and quite frankly that will probably wind up being the only good season of his entire career.

  21. eh…not sure about that plan Packers. Listen I like Ced Benson – he ran hard for the Bengals (and no one has come close to filling his shoes yet this year) – but he’s limited. He’s a grinder, but he fumbles too much and he’s just not capable of any big plays. He also gets a little crabby when he doesn’t get the rock, which is a little silly when his performance is stalling the offense. If I had Aaron Rodgers and their receiving corps, feeding Ced would NOT be my first priority. I also think it’s weird that they don’t have any love for Starks. I know he’s been injured, but it seems like he came back and he’s in the doghouse already.

  22. Guys on 1 year contracts tend to be less “cranky” around the locker room. Tends to be a motivating factor. If he ends up fumbling a lot come November, maybe James Starks’ toe will finally be in shape to run.

  23. I don’t think the Packers are under any misconceptions about what they have. I think they’re just saying that Cedric Benson is a better option than James Starks, Brandon Saine or Alex Green.

    As others have pointed out – even if he just falls forward for positive yards on most of his carries, he’ll be better than what we’ve seen around here for the past few years. It’s not like they’re trying to re-invent themselves as a running team all of a sudden.

  24. It’s weird watching a competent back in green and gold. He makes the right cut every time, and is squeezing every last yard out of each of his runs. They don’t need him to get 100 yards per game. They need him to keep the opposing safeties honest, and leave the offense in manageable down and distances. He’s more than earning his keep so far.

  25. mikebrownfaux says:
    Oct 2, 2012 5:03 PM
    Much like Raiders Fans believe they have Carson Palmer circa 2005, I see a lot of people believing the Packers have Cedric Benson circa 2009. Ced had one good year with the Bengals and quite frankly that will probably wind up being the only good season of his entire career.
    =============================

    I don’t think anybody thinks Ced benson will be anything more than an average RB. All the Pack needs is a reasonable semblance of a running game. They just need something to keep opposing defenses from dropping 9 men in coverage every down.

  26. Play’em Pack. He was my sleeper Fantasy pick!
    On a more serious note, Hes playing well. Hes a fourth quater back who wears down defenses early to get big chunks later in the game. That requires 20 carries or so a game. GIeE him the rock pack!!!!!!!!
    Hes done okay so far, but has played 3 top 5 defenses at stopping the run!!!.(Niners, Bears, Seahawks) WHAT in gods name were you expecting??? Cedric is going to be great going forward, he needs his touches but that will relax some of the pressure off of the passing game will open up this huge games weve grown to expect! Best option on the team and revitalized under the contract circumstances!
    Of course he shouldnt be cut down in attempts,its going to get easier and better with playing time! And I need him and Spillers to help me win my fantasy league..LOL

  27. thepvyharvin says:
    Oct 2, 2012 4:17 PM
    “Keep feeding him,,,,signed Vikings Defense”
    ———————————-
    Be careful what you wish for…
    Considering how easy it was for James Starks to run through that vaunted viking defense during a 4 minute drill last year….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!