nfoligno

I'm done. Bradj, I have enjoyed debated w/ you for some time, but you don't seem to care about anything at this point but ripping Benson. He has not lived up to expectations (understatement alert) but the hatred you are showing is unusual. What the hell. IMHO, Rex has been just as big of a disappointment, and I would argue has hurt this team more than Benson. We have had plenty of busts, and plenty of failed FAs, but I don't think I have ever seen you direct so much hate toward a player. So enjoy your Benson bashing. I'll leave you too it.

He is a dude w/ good taste. And just to throw this out there, but this chick is a pretty fair representation of women in Texas. I have to disagree w/ the beach boys, not to mention David Lee Roth. I have been all over as well, and IMHO, the chicks here are tops. Hot as can be, as they are numerous places, but also w/ a great attitude. In Chicago, I go out w/ my cousin, and it cracks me up. Sure, there are some incredible looking chicks, but others were would rate no better than a 6, IMHO, down here have attitude like they are a 10. Even the 10s around here know they are a dime a dozen and can not afford an attitude like that. And for the record, the University of Texas is stock like a bass pond.

More and more witnesses are stepping forward, and now his friends on the boat are saying the 2nd officer asked if any of them were able to drive the boat, and my understanding is this was answered in the positive. So even if Benson were the owner and/or said he was the captain, at the same time, if others said there were capable, that should have been the end of it.

I think everyone would love for that, but for most fans, Adams is more of an unknown 7th round pick. The reality is, few 7th round picks even make the 53 man roster, much less are immediate starters their rookie season.

IMHO, the three rookies to watch for PT are Forte, Harrison and Steltz. Forte - IMHO, his number of carries depends on not just whether Benson steps up, but to what extent. Unless Benson breaks out like a top 5 draft pick, I think Forte will not only get carries, but a pretty significant number. I can see a situation where Benson gets 15-20 carries per game (again, if he steps up) and Forte gets 5-10 carries per game, w/ a few catches involved too. If Benson doesn't step up, Forte will carry the load. Harrison - If he is half the player the staff talks about, then I can see him playing a lot. Going into camp, I think he and Dusty vie for the starting job. I think Dusty wins, but Harrison will still see a lot of action through rotation, especially on run downs. Stelts - Camp will be key. IMHO, Steltz is either our starting SS or a special teams player. I do not see a ton of middle ground here. As high as many are on Steltz, I just do not see him starting. My hope is Payne steps up, but I think it more likely McGowan is our starting SS.

And if he were charged w/ public intox, this would be a whole different story, but he was not. Sorry, but there really doesn't seem to be much of a gray area. What does DWI stand for? Driver while intoxicated. If the boat was in park, then no one was driving. It really is pretty cut and dry. IMHO, there is no chance the DWI sticks. The resisting arrest however is not as easily dismissed, whether the original charge is bogus or not.

Where my comparison fails? Okay, how about this one. As you know, I live in Texas. Here in Texas we are a pickup truck state. To hell w/ gas prices. No clue about other places, but a popular thing to do, especially in small towns, is drive out to a field for a party. Often you have people siting on chairs in the bed of their truck, w/ the keys in the ignition so the radio can play. This is also a very normal sight on the beach in Padre. Anyway, the owner of the truck can be on the truck, keys in the ignitiion, but the truck is in park and no one behind the wheel. Is that a good comparison? In that situation, the driver will NOT get a DWI. He might get an open container, unless he is smart enough to poor his beer into an open cup. I do not understand why, but it is legal to have a cup of beer in the car (not the driver) but an open can of the same substance is against the law. Point is, the owner of the car may be written up for several violations, but DWI is NOT one of them. If Benson was hit w/ an open container violation, I could understand. If he were hit w/ public intoxication, it would make sense. But I am sorry, DWI? I don't claim to be an expert on DWI laws, but I will bet you that charge does not stick. If it is true the boat was parked and Benson not behind the wheel at the time the police came aboard, no judge will convict him, whether he was drunk or not. The defense for this would simply be far too easy. Hell, all he has to say is his mother was going to drive the boat home. As no one check his mother, or anyone else, for intoxication, there is no way to say they were not a designated driver.

Regarding "sleeping it off", that I would call different because the individual is behind the wheel of the car. Also, it sort of depend on the situation. If the car is parked outside a bar, then it likely is not going to be a DWI. If the car is on the side of the road, then the obvious belief is the driver drove the car to that point, and if drunk, DWI. But this is all different from a person simply being on the boat he owns, and the boat being at anchor. As for possession, no, I have never heard of that. If there are drugs, or the like, in the car but not on a person, then yes, the owner of the vehicle gets the charge, but not if the drugs on on the possession of someone else in the car, which you allude to. regardless, this is not a logical step to the DWI laws. If a passenger in the car is drunk, does the driver get a public intoxication charge? No. I agree it is easy to compare boating to driving in terms of DWIs, but that is the whole point. The boat was at anchor (parked). While Benson is the owner, he was not the driver and not behind the wheel. Consider this. You and your friends go out, and you drove your car. At the party, cops test you, and because you had a vehicle there, they arrest you for a DWI. To me, that would be the more logical comparison. Problem is, there is no way to know whether or not you would have driven the car. At some point during the party, you could have agreed to have one of your friends remain sober and drive your car. If Benson was behind the wheel and driving the boat, there is no question this would be a DWI issue. Whether or not Benson was drunk would be key, but it would be a DWI issue. But the boat being at anchor changes things IMHO.

More pictures to come? Just caught the below piece off PFT, which uses a local Austin paper as its source. Benson hiring an attorney is no shock, but one thing that did stand out from the story is a member of the boat, a former Texas LB, took pictures. He is the fiancee of the chick already discussed. That isn't new news. But they are saying he took pictures of Benson while he was undergoing a field sobriety test and being arrested That is new news. If he has pictures showing Benson during the tests, which may show him not being aggressive or falling down drunk, that could go a long way toward making Benson's case. http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/ BENSON HIRES LAWYER TO FIGHT CHARGES Posted by Michael David Smith on May 8, 2008, 2:04 p.m. Bears running back Cedric Benson, who says he was mistreated by officers who pepper sprayed him during a weekend boating excursion, has hired a new lawyer as he prepares to fight charges of boating while intoxicated and resisting arrest, the Austin American-Statesman is reporting. “I do not believe from what I’ve been told that Cedric was intoxicated,” lawyer Sam Bassett said. “I do not believe he was aggressive toward an officer to warrant being pepper sprayed.” Meanwhile, the paper reports that former Texas linebacker Aaron Harris also was on Benson’s boat, and that Harris said he took pictures of Benson while he was undergoing a field sobriety test and being arrested, pictures that he plans to give to Benson’s lawyer. Harris is the fiancé of Elizabeth Cartwright, another passenger on the boat, who told the Chicago Tribune that Benson wasn’t drunk and was mistreated by police. On the night in question, Cartwright says she called her father and told him “to call 911 and tell them my black friend is getting beat up by cops,” possibly suggesting that Cartwright believed the police targeted Benson because he is black. The Lower Colorado River Authority, which made the arrest, says that in the last five years, its officers have made 457 arrests on the lake, and that 428 of the people arrested were white and 10 were black. The American-Statesman reports that Bassett will represent Benson in a preliminary hearing on May 19 in front of a Travis County administrative judge.

Williams - He will start at LT, but will struggle quite a bit this year. Sorry, but while I like him too, and love his future, rookie LTs are simply going to struggle. But he will start, and may play on par w/ Tait last year. Forte - I still think Benson wins the starting job, but Forte will have a role, and significant role. He will be more than just a 3rd down back, and will see plenty of PT. Bennett - I see him finishing stronger than he starts. I think he will see plays early on, but will not be a consistent weapon. Harrison - #3 DT in a system that rotates 3 DTs. Steltz - I do not believe he starts. He plays special teams this year, and maybe some sub packages. Bowman - I see nearly no role this year. Too much depth at CB, and I am not sure whether we are willing to risk injury on teams. Davis - Again, no role. He is not a good blocker. He can learn, but that takes time. I do not see what he would bring that Olsen/Clark would not. Special teams player. Baldwin - Practice squad or nothing. Adams - One of Adams/Barton make the team for the final OL spot. The other hopes to make the practice squad. LaRoque - Maybe final LB spot if he can standout on special teams. Monk - IR this year.

It is not a love afair w/ Orton so much as giving up on Rex. In Rex, many fans simply feel we know what we have, and it just isn't that good. Most of those same fans would share skepticism in Orton, but at the same time, he is simply more of an unknown, and in this situation, unknown may be better than the known. Orton may suck, plain and simple. But the "may" in that sentence is still a step better than the belief that we know Rex sucks. You may disagree, but I am trying to explain what you perceive as a love afair for Rex. Maybe its like the feelings at RB. I often asked what was up w/ the love afair for AP. Last year, fan after fan talked about how AP could start for many teams, and my response? Huh? Now I think it wasn't so much love for AP as much as contempt for Benson. So maybe Orton is AP. A backup fans like because of the dislike for the starter ahead of him. Or maybe he is different. Maybe he is a player who, if given a chance, can be a better QB than Rex. I really do not know, but I would at least like to see the open competition to find out.

I here what you are saying, and thought about this myself. In the end, it came down to what each player brings/potentially brings, above the shoulders. Below the shoulders, I believe there is no question Rex is the better. Where I feel he fails is above the shoulders, and that is not something I believe can develop. I have no clue if Orton has it above the shoulders or not, though I will say his pocket presense has looked pretty good, but not knowing is a step up from Rex. I would love for Rex to prove me wrong, but I have flat out given up on him. Rex Grossman to me is similar to Simms. Plenty of talent, but not enough upstairs to be a NFL Qb.

I do love the role of devils advocate, but no, that is not it. I was ripping AP during the season for his blocking. I am NOT saying Benson is a good blocker. He and AP are opposites. AP has the knowledge. He picks up the right man, but fails to actually make the block. Benson does not always pick up the right man, but is excellent when he does engage. As for taking the staffs word for it, since when do you simply follow the staffs word. If you did, you would think Daniel Manning was due for the pro bowl. Angelo flat out said he is looking for Harrison to be a starter. Dusty began the year as our starter, so it sounds like he is looking to replace Dusty. Big picture. Dusty has been injured his only two years, and Harris is in his final contract year. Whatever is said, I think Harrison was brought in w/ the future of both Dusty and Harris being is question. Arch would have likely entered the season as the #3 safety. We did not draft Steltz to be our #3 SS. I think you don't like Benson. I am not sure it is as simple for the staff as like/dislike. I think it is simply an issue of trust and injury. RB is a key position, and the staff has simply said we can not afford to trust Benson, at least not w/o a backup plan in place. Actually, I have said for some time we would not keep 4 RBs. I simply look at it this way. If Benson steps up, then AP or Wolfe are in trouble. If Benson fails, then we have our 3. We "talked" about starting Benson, and it didn't happen. By your logic, should we have cut TJ? I disagree AP is a lock. I am sure Lovie would like to keep him, but if Benson steps up, then IMHO, AP has no role as a RB on the team. Then the staff has to decide if they want to keep him as a specialist, or cut him. IMHO, we go into camp, and the only person who is a lock is Forte, though not the lock to start some would like to believe. If Benson does step up, I think he starts, Forte plays plenty, and then you have a battle between AP and Wolfe. I am sorry, but I simply do not see the reason to keep both. I simply disagree. In his state of the union, he flat out called out the OL too. You say he was happy enough w/ his QB and OL, but Angelo has said many times now he was not impressed w/ this years class of QB, which lends the impression it isn't confidence in who we have, but a lack of confidence in who was available. May be the same at OG. As for the 2nd rounder being replacement and not competition, who was our 2nd round pick last year? Bazuin. Was he supposed to replace Wale, Brown or Anderson? How about Daniel Manning? Replacement for Brown, or insurance? Bradley the year before. Replacement for Berrian/Moose, or competition? Tha is what I have said all along. If Benson doesn't step up in camp, he is gone. End of story. But I simply do not see the point in cutting him now. We need more than 3 RBs going into camp, so there is simply no point in cutting him. Final point. Does Benson have any value in trade today? No. Even if we do not like him, if he can show something in camp, and we still want him gone to clear the way for Forte, his value could go up. May not happen, but his value can't go down.

Here is how I have always viewed that question, as it has come up a lot. IMHO, on paper, there may not be a great difference, but in reality, there is. I think if Lovie built his ideal team, he would have a pair of safeties that may well be interchangable, but that is based on finding ideal players. I would argue Mike Brown could be an example of the ideal. If you have two Mike Browns, then you can easily say the two positions are interchangable. But the reality is, safeties like Mike Brown are rare. For years I have listened to Lovie say this, and I have always called BS. Finding a safety that is as solid in deep coverage as he is in run support is simply rare. I had not read that, and would be disappointed if we did not give Payne a very legit shot at SS. He is a hell of an athlete. Still, even if we do talk about him replacing BA on teams, I think he would still be in the competition, and if proves the best, I do not think the staff wanting him on teams would get in the way. Hated the pick then and now.

Except that I believe it was 9:30 at night, and thus dark. No telling how lit the LCRA's boat was. I do not have much hope there will be many witnesses, other than those on Benson's boat. What I would love to hear is whether or not there was a video camera on the LCRA boat. Some years back, police cars started keeping camera to capture, among other things, field sobriety tests. I personally questioned why Benson was taken off his boat. If the LCRA boat had a camera going, it would make more sense.

Best case, what I would hope for: QB - Orton RB - Benson WR - Bennett & Bradley TE - Olsen Benson over Forte because his being their means he stepped up and earned it. Forte being there may have as much to do w/ Benson flopping as Forte stepping up. No Booker at WR because if Bennett and Bradley are starting, that would mean they played lights out in order to beat out Booker.

I have addressed this before, but what she heard is relevant, as it IMHO seems to better coincide w/ Benson's version than the cops. The cops version was that Benson basically fought the cop the entire way. Benson was rude, loud and cussing through out most of the situation. If that was so, I think it logical that she would have been able to hear that, but per her testimony, she didn't hear Benson until after he was sprayed. Far from smoking gun evidence in support of Benson, but also relevant. I question your flat dismissing her comments simply because she did not see anything. Have you ever been to a trial? Hearing what a person says is often as important as seeing what a person does. Further, she said her boyfriend, fiance or whatever, took pictures of the situation, and said those pictures will further support Benson's side of the story. No idea yet what those pictures are, but if they do not support Benson's version, do you think she would have mentioned them? Yes, I am sure it is. But what she heard, yes, heard again, matters. Per the cops, Benson was cussing at this point. Per Benson, he was still using the word please, not cussing, and still trying to be polite. Per the girl, he did in fact use the word please as he asked for his mother to be present. Further, just listen to what she said Benson said. That does not sound like a guy on the attack, but a guy scared due to the situation. While I agree it is odd, at the same time, I would argue it fits in w/ the idea of profiling and prejudice. This was in heat of the moment, as opposed to a day later coming up w/ a defense for a professional athlete. Sure, bogus 911 calls are made all the time. Still, as a part of the rest of the parts, I think it does matter. Regarding prejudices, we all have them at play here. I have no issue w/ police what so ever. I do still like Benson, and thus am more likely willing to look beyond the police report. At the same time, let me say this. When I first heard of the arrest, my thoughts were of Benson acting like a thug, and that he has grown nada since leaving school. Basically, my initial thought was of leinart, but far worse. So while I like Benson, that did not prevent me from automatically slapping blame to him. Then the next day, I read more and more that just seemed "off", and the more time that passes (which has not been much) the more info that comes out that just adds questions. So I admit I have bias, but at the same time, that bias did not prevent me from initially believing he was guilty. Where I question you is, it seems there are quite a few issues at play that are (at minimum) questionable, and yet you do not seem willing to even consider them. A girl comes forward, and you immediately dismiss her. I swear, if she were standing right there and saw (as well as heard) everything, I do not think that would matter to you. For you, it is simple. Cops word v whoever else, and no matter what, you take the cops. And by the way, I have said this before too, but if this were a DPS officer or Texas Ranger, or the like, I might be more inclined to agree w/ you, but LCRA authorities simply do not get blind faith in my eyes.

Okay, this is a sidebar and all, but just to sort of wrap up a tad, I did a bit of research on the subject. AZ Supremem Ct did uphold a law that allows the authorities to obtain a blood test, w/o permission, after 3 consenting breathalizers. Rationale is the individual waived his rights against searches when he/she said yes to a breathalizer. The case that went before the court involved a person who took the breathalizer 3 times, w/ varying scores, and the police then forced a blood test to corroborate. St Supreme Ct ruled in favor, split decision, for the police. Disenting judge blasted the court. US Supreme Ct decided not to review the writ. So I am not sure it is considered legal to force a blood test w/o prior breathalizer consent, but who knows there. Several legal journals have talked about AZ, and other states, which have passed similar laws and how they go against our constitution. These DWI related laws are put into a category of law which are simply not constitutionally legal, but public sentiment is such that the courts simply do not follow the laws the should. Anyway, for what its worth. Just felt it was some interesting info. One pretty decent article you can read, if bored, http://www.azduiatty.com/supreme-court-oks...reath-tests.htm

Move to Texas. Refuse to blow, and the police have no option to forcably take blood. You lose your liscense for 6 months (automatic for refusing a breathalizer) but the liklihood of actually getting nailed w/ a DWI become far weaker. If you bomb the field test, and it is on tape, you could still be in trouble, but even then, far from a slam dunk. Frankly, I am surprised the policies there have not been challenged. Criminals file claims of their prison cells being poor to the point of being unconstitutional (cruel and unusual punishment). I can only imagine the argument for tent city in 120 degrees, or 20 degrees. Not to mention forcing a person to give blood against their wishes. Blood is no different from DNA testing. If police have a suspect and want a DNA sample, they need either the suspects permission, or a court order giving permission, which is no slam dunk to get either. I don't see how taking blood would be different. I know nothing about AZ Constitutional Law, but it sure sounds like there are US Con Law violations going on there.

Regarding race, it may sound like BS to you, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. I have pointed to this before, but Drake, who coached at Texas, alluded to this himself when he talked about knowing how things are there. You can argue he is just sticking up for Benson, but it is one thing to stick up for your guy, and another to insinuate prejudice is in play in an area. She didn't see anything because the officer took Benson to an area where they could not be seen. Further, even if she could not see everything, hearing what was going does provide support to one side or the other as well. Besnon has said he was polite, and didn't cuss. The officers indicate he was loudly cussing and resisting arrest. Per the witness, voices could not really be heard until after the pepper spray. This would go against the officers version of Benson yelling cuss words and the such. Further, even after Benson was sprayed, while his words are elevated, he is still using the word please, and again, still no mention of Benson cussing out the offcier. So while she could not see the actions, the words she heard does seem to better corraborate Benson's story/version. There is a big difference between being perterbed and being aggressive to the point of pepper spray being necessary. I don't see that. It was not some small boat. They could have easily seperated the group of friends from Benson and performed the test on Benson's boat, and done so in a controlled environment. They were on the boat for a safety inspection, which was passed. At that point, Benson has done nothing wrong. Forcing him to leave his boat simply is not right, IMHO. Sorry. I think there is a combo here of your (1) dislike for Benson and (2) blind trust for the officers. If this were DPS, Texas Rangers, or even the Sherrif's office, I might feel different, but this is a wanna be cop organization which simply does not have training equal to that of legit police forces. Heck, I wonder if they even carry guns. I think you are putting too much faith in this authority, and closing your eyes and ears to anything that doesn't seem right, or may not have been done properly.

No even close. "and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause" This has not been interpreted that an office can search anytime he has probable cause, but that when probable cause exists, a search warrant can be obtained. That is the point there. W/o a warrant, you can not perform the search. Simply having probable cause does not grant the officer the right to a search.

class is in session. Freeney was a reach for Indy, and they said as much, but sometimes reaching for the player you want, that fits your system, simply makes sense IMHO. I would also throw this out there. What do we base a "reach" on. We see Kiper and all the rest tell us where they rank a player, but that does not mean it is how Angelo ranks a player. While some feel Forte was a reach, it is all together possible he was the BPA on Angelo's board. Thus, would he be a reach?

I agree Steltz should be a SS. At the same time, (1) Steltz indicated he was being considered at FS. It didn't appear it was his idea, but the staffs. Why would the staff mention this at all? (2) Wasn't Mike Brown considered more of an in the box SS coming out of college? He didn't have the speed or range to play FS, or so the thought went, but FS is where he played. I would not rule anything out w/ this staff. They also talked about DM at SS.

Something that stands out to me is, why does the officer take Benson to the LCRA boat for the test, and not simply perform the test on Benson's boat. I am not sure how many witnesses there truly are, as the girl says herself she could not see what happened, and really just heard. She can be a witness in that the officers claims Benson was loud and cussing, while she seems to indicate nothing could be heard until he was sprayed, which seems to contradict the officers story, but she apparantly could not hear anything. But it still sticks w/ me. Why was Benson taken off his boat for the tests. Before removing him from his boat, would you not first test him to see if it was even necessary? That the officers takes Benson from his boat, and obviously to a position on the LCRA boat outside of the view of witnesses, once again, it just leaves a bad impression IMHO.

I think it may well be important. From the get-go, there have been numerous comments made that allude to prejudice in that area. I went to college about 20 minutes from Austin, and spent nearly every weekend at one bar or another in Austin, and never saw any racism, but I have never been on Lake Travis, and that is where the comments are being made about. WR coach Drake, who was also a coach at Texas, made a comment about knowing how things go on there, and IMHO, was alluding to some racism. Benson, IMHO, alludes to this as well as he talks about how he can not take his boat out w/o being stopped. IMHO, the student likely feels the same way, and when the police (in her belief) were harrassing and attacking her friend, the racism was key in her mind, and thus likely the choice of words.