More photos » Nick Wass - AP

4 months ago: Cincinnati Bengals running back Cedric Benson (32) is chased by Baltimore Ravens safety Ed Reed while scoring a touchdown during the third quarter of an NFL football game, Sunday, Oct. 11, 2009 in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Nick Wass)

Browse more photos »

In a release by the NFL on Tuesday, the Bengals' Cedric Benson has received 321,552 votes for the 2009 NFL Pro Bowl. That's the most by any running back in the AFC and second most among any player in the conference. The Pro Bowl consists of three votes; a consensus vote of the fans, the players and coaches. Each group counts for one-third of the total vote that determines each roster. The top vote getters are as follows:

No other Bengals player is leading in votes. The league made several changes this year to the Pro Bowl; it'll be played on the mainland in Miami a week before the Super Bowl (January 31, 2010).

When a journalist elicits an opposite response of the one they had aimed for, does that mean he succeeded or failed? Sunday night, after the Bengals beat the Steelers (sorry, I just can't stop saying that!), CBS' Gregg Doyel, wrote that Cincinnati's chances of winning is based on whether or not Chad Ochocinco can keep it "buttoned up".

But the Bengals can't be called a playoff lock yet, because they still have to traverse the mental minefield that is Chad Ochocinco. I tried to traverse it after the game Sunday, and it didn't go so well.

After reminding us of Chad's history before the 2009 season, including wrongfully dating Chad's "trade demands" in 2007 rather than 2008, Doyel continues during a one-on-one interview.

"I never have a big impact in games when we're up against these guys," he said. "They throw the whole house on me. But it's not always going to be about me. It was a team win today."

He went on, and was complimentary about the Pittsburgh defense, but I asked one more question, and that's where it went south. And don't look at me like that. I knew what I was going to write after this game -- read my first sentence again; I wrote it right after the game ended, before I went to the locker room for interviews -- and I wanted Ochocinco's thoughts on the topic.

Me: "As the season goes along -- you guys are 7-2, first place in the division -- are you going to be OK if it stays 'not about you'?"

Him: "Sure I am -- wait. What? Why are you so interested in talking about me?"

Me: "Because you're so interested in talking about you. And that interests me."

Him: "You need to get out of here."

Jake wrote on Monday that "Doyel was just upset that Chad told him to get lost." I think it's more than that. I think Doyel had every intention of writing a negatively-spun article about Chad no matter what Chad said or did. Doyel asks Chad about Chad, and Chad, upset that it turned to just him, leaves. The irony of all ironies, I say. Then you ask yourself, what did Doyel really bring us here? Does he bring us insight into the game he's covering? Does he bring us a unique perspective about what he saw? No, he couldn't keep Chad seated for the interview. What did you learn about Chad? WDR simply called this a glamour piece for Doyel, who wanted everyone to pay attention to him. In other words, a glamour-whore.

In truth, Doyel's article did bring me insight. I'm starting to actually believe that Chad is a bigger team player than what we believed. How's that for irony?