Bernard Scott suffered leg cramps Sunday, forcing Caldwell to return kicks again

by Josh Kirkendall on Nov 23, 2009 1:37 PM EST in Injury

There were questions. And then there were more questions. That's what losses like this do to us. We ask more and more questions. My question? Why did we replace Bernard Scott with Andre Caldwell on kickoff returns. Let me clarify something right immediately. I really like Caldwell. I think he has a bright future and he's a large part why the Bengals achieved 7-2, earning themselves the nickname, Cardiac Cats. Furthermore, of all of our receivers, I believe he has the most upside. However, as a kickoff returner, he leaves a lot to be desired.

Through 28 kickoff returns, Caldwell is averaging 18.7 yards-per-return with a long of 39 yards. He's fumbled twice and recorded ten 20-yard returns. Then there's Bernard Scott. The rookie running back has recorded eight kickoff returns, seven of which he's returned 20 yards or more, and a 34.5 yard-per-return average. Oh, and he's got a 96-yard touchdown return against the Steelers; a team that just set a new NFL record allowing a touchdown return in eight straight games.

Scott had just started becoming the primary return man against the Steelers last week and even returned a 15-yard kickoff early against Oakland. However, with 59 seconds left in the second quarter, Scott gave way back to Caldwell, who had a 22-yard return and a lost fumble with :33 seconds left in the game. When Scott finally reappeared on kickoff return with 15 seconds left in the game and the Bengals trailing 20-17, the Raiders squibbed it to Quan Cosby, who returned it to Cincinnati's 37-yard line.

Originally, it was expected that Scott had, at the very worst, an injury when Caldwell started returning kicks to close the first half. Or maybe the Bengals were wanting to give him a breather while becoming the workhorse for Sunday. The former, and perhaps some of the latter, became true. Scott had been suffering leg cramps, which put Caldwell back to return kicks.

This isn't a slam on either player. I think both are the future of this team and have proven to be great talents. It just is what it is. Next week, Scott should be back to returning kicks while being the guy that gives Cedric Benson a rest against the Cleveland Browns. And if the Bengals don't punish the Browns after that loss to Oakland...

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Even with solomo wilcotts’ lovefest, it was clear to the observant bengals fan that Scott was largely ineffective against the 28th ranked rushing defense. His stats were ballooned by a 70 yd run, without it and the 10 yd run he averaged a little more than a yard a carry.

That is unacceptable with as good as this line run blocks. It’s clear now that the Larry Johnson signing was a necessity and not an after though. Scott has been weak in the two chunks of action at tailback he has seen. He and Leonard are solid 3rd down backs but in this offense we need a stud. Hopefully benson gets healthy or LJ is a quick learner.

by jrscheper on Nov 23, 2009 1:43 PM EST via mobile reply actions

I agree jrscheper. Nice assessment. I was wondering if anyone else would recognize that there's a serious production drop off when Ced is not on the field. I hope LJ is the answer

by ACaliBENGALSFan on Nov 23, 2009 2:45 PM EST up reply actions

it would help if the majority of Scott's runs were not between the tackles

by featherman on Nov 23, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions

but then bratkowski would be effectively using the tools at his disposal, and we can’t have that.

i'm going to go america all over your ass!

by Raging Clue on Nov 23, 2009 10:31 PM EST up reply actions

Why do we always keep bad teams hanging around

Why does Bratkowksi always go to ball control after we get a little lead. Palmer was 8/9 in the first half. We could have stomped on them right away and put it out of reach. Instead we got to run, run, pass every series. With the type of O that we have and as good as Palmer is we should be chucking it downfield. Pass to set up the run. Its getting ridiculous. The turnovers killed us but it shouldn’t have been that close anyway. We need to use our passing game more efficiently. If we dont stomp on Cleveland and Detroit in the next two games we are in deep do do.

by cincy1977 on Nov 23, 2009 2:51 PM EST reply actions

I was thinking the same thing.

Why not try to go up 21-0 then go to ball control? I understand the desire to control the ball, its an excellent way to beat a good team. But the way to beat a bad or desperate team is to spank them until they have no hope left then run the ball down their throats. If you switch to ball control too early, they maintain hope and are kept in the game.

by jim0ijk on Nov 24, 2009 8:28 AM EST up reply actions

Brat puts us in the doo doo

and keeps us there. He makes a good game plan once every four-six weeks.. the rest of the time he runs the same plays over and over and lets them stall out. How does he still have a job?

by 80%OFTHETIMEIMRIGHTEVERYTIME on Nov 23, 2009 3:31 PM EST reply actions

Could not have said it better..

I was thinking the same thing. Teams will spank us in the playoffs if we don’t change the offense scheme, if we make the playoffs….Now we have to worry about Cleveland and Detroit after this mess of a game.

by cincy1977 on Nov 23, 2009 3:42 PM EST reply actions