FanPost

Beanie Wells, were they right?

When we drafted Chris "Beanie" Wells with our 31st draft pick in 2009 many of us were excited for his potential. His college career is filled with great stats and awesome highlights and in limited games last season he showed glimpses of his ability with angry, overpowering runs and nasty stiff arms. Yet so far this season he has underwhelmed in his performances. Hampered by an early season knee injury, something that surely would have grabbed headlines were we a main market team (I really wanted an excuse to use "knee-gate..."), Beanie hasn't lived up to his potential.

 

When Beanie first arrived he was inhibited by a late graduation but also by an ankle injury. This year he has been hampered by knee issues. Currently this week he has been sitting out still recovering from an allergic reaction which was obviously was an issue last week as he only garnered 1 carry. If he sits out again this week against Seattle we might finally have to break down and call him an injury liability. 

His career is young and so it is tough to judge. RB's normally are the fastest players to integrate into an NFL offense. Often high drafted RB's have instant impacts and if not for Brett Farve refusing to go silently into that good night, Beanie would have probably won the ROTY award over Percy Harvin. In only 179 carries he averaged 4.5 yards, with 7 touchdowns and a 793 yards on the ground with an additional 143 in the air. So far this year he has averaged a weak 3.5 YPC, with only 2 TD's and a mere 231 yards amassed on the ground. Though there is till some season left to play.

History has showed us that injury prone players in college often do not survive the wear and tear of an NFL season. So the question we are left with is who was right? Were the experts right about Beanie? Or are this injuries just minor roadblocks to a great career? 

<em>This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Revenge of the Birds' (ROTB) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of ROTB's editors.</em>