DC Tom Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Are you sure? As taken from Tim Graham's blog at http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/...row-ricky-throw "Lynch's career" <> "this season"
BillsfaninFl Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Anyone that seriously thinks the Bills need to just get rid of Lynch knows nothing about the NFL today. You need 2 good starting backs today. Do you think Miami fans complain that Williams needs to start over Brown (or vice versa?) Jackson and Lynch both bring 2 different things to the Bills offence. Jackson is more of the speed rusher, he has that burst that gets him around guys, while Lynch is more of the power back thats going to drag defenders for a couple of extra yards. I don't know why Bills fans always have to find something wrong with everything instead of appreciating what they have. Excellent point. Remember how good Marshawn looked before the O-line was dismantled? Right now, Fred is the man because it is a "make your own hole" offense. With some line improvement, both could again be the hard to stop guys we watched before this season. Think ahead.
bills44 Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Yes, I misread it, it's for this season. ah, gotcha.
spartacus Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Leaving us exactly 1 good starting back short. but Lynch is a high quality thug - too bad he still does not run the plays where designed
Mike in Syracuse Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Lynch's running style depends a lot more on him getting past the initial line of scrimmage. If he breaks into the LB level or the secondary he is an absolute beast. He's not as elusive, nor does he see the hole as well as Jackson appears to. It also seems that Jackson is a bit more patient with his blocks. If we can ever solidify our OL the tandem will be nasty.
Estro Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 I have no idea why Lynch was returned to starting duties. Well for starters, Dick was a moron. Never willing to ruffle the feathers and sit a starter even if it meant keeping a worse guy on the field. Why do you think the players loved him so much? There was no accountability, players didn't even have to produce and were still able to hang onto their starting positions with the Bills. How would you like to go to work, stink it up continually and have your boss say "it's alright just keep working hard." ?Sounds like an easy gig to me.
silvermike Posted November 29, 2009 Author Posted November 29, 2009 Lynch looked better than McGahee, but he never looked like a great back. He had three 100 yard games in 2008, and three more as a rookie. He's not a scrub, but he's nothing special. He doesn't fumble much, he doesn't get hurt much, and he can get a few yards when you need a few yards, but he doesn't break many big gains, he doesn't take over a game, and he's not a threat in the passing game. At best, he's a 1B back, most of the time, he's well suited to his current role: spelling Fred Jackson.
GripnRip Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Lynch belongs behind zone blockers - something I can't imagine our line handling at this point in their development. If Shanahan doesn't land in Buffalo and Lynch goes elsewhere, it will be a zone blocking team.
sharper802 Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Not so fast on Lynch. It was his play that let them kick the 56 yrd FG. He played fine today. Fred deserves to start and lynch will play valuable minutes.
Estro Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Leaving us exactly 1 good starting back short. Haha, exactly! I would also argue that Lynch epitomizes average as far as RB's are concerned. I saw one guy say Freddy's better at gaining yards when there is no hole, which probably means he'd be better when there actually is a hole right? The excuses used on this board to defend Lynch's lack of production every single week is comical. I would say someone who thinks Lynch can stay on board making about $5 million next season to see 3-7 touches a week (which is all he deserves) doesn't understand football very well. There will be backs the Bills could sign next offseason who would cost less and be more productive. If he'd be willing to take a pay cut and be paid like a backup fine, but to be paid like a starter and produce like he has is unacceptable. The Ricky Williams, Ronnie Brown comparison does not work because they are both very valuable backs, the same does not apply with the Bills. You don't see the Rams split carries with Steven Jackson and Samkon Gado because it happens to work for the Dolphins......just like you shouldn't see Freddy split with Lynch when the former is clearly better at nearly all phases of the game. Lynch is more of a name than a player these days. Forget his nicknames and his "cool" looking hair and watch his play on the field. It's not very good, it's actually pretty bad.
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 What is the status on the contracts of both Edwards and Lynch? I would think Lynch has some trade value... the other one, they can waive him.
thewildrabbit Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Some players get hot at certain times, no doubt it was a good day for both Fred Jackson and Fitzpatrick which resulted in a win against the hated Dolphins. Time will tell with the current O line and Fitz, with good coaching and decent line play and he should improve as time goes by, not get worse... which is what happened with TE and JP.
Red Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 This is really a non-issue guys. Its a positive. For all of those talking about Jackson's age, lets also consider that he has been playing in the minor leagues for some time, and though it takes a toll on a body, it is not NFL-style pounding that he has been under. Also, he has been #2 or sharing the duties thus far. That also extends a career.
drg2021 Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Lynch looked better than McGahee, but he never looked like a great back. He had three 100 yard games in 2008, and three more as a rookie. He's not a scrub, but he's nothing special. He doesn't fumble much, he doesn't get hurt much, and he can get a few yards when you need a few yards, but he doesn't break many big gains, he doesn't take over a game, and he's not a threat in the passing game. At best, he's a 1B back, most of the time, he's well suited to his current role: spelling Fred Jackson. Beastmode Baby
Bufcomments Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 No way Lynch is done here. Freddie took the job away from him, and he deserved it. Lynch lost his job during the offseason when he got the gun charge. He has nobody to blame but himself. But to say its over is way premature.
Estro Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 What would his trade value be? Not much, how many teams would be desperate enough to take on a $5 million dollar contract on for a RB who isn't producing. I don't even know if a team would part with a 5th round pick for Lynch, they'd really have to be sold on the fact that he was bad as a result of being on the Bills and not vice versa. If his contract was cheaper he'd have some sort of value, but at his price I don't think many teams who want to take that risk. Maybe you get a sucker like Dan Snyder to trade a 3rd-4th rounder, but I think a 5th or 6th is more realistic. One thing for sure, you can't trade hime within the divsion.
Erik Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 People forget that we have nothing behind Jackson and Lynch. We also have too many holes to fill so I'd rather not make another one we have to fill this offseason. That was the problem with Levy/Jauron...they created holes then filled holes and the holes that were open always stayed open. Lynch stays another year at least.
BuffaloBill Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Anyone that seriously thinks the Bills need to just get rid of Lynch knows nothing about the NFL today. You need 2 good starting backs today. Do you think Miami fans complain that Williams needs to start over Brown (or vice versa?) Jackson and Lynch both bring 2 different things to the Bills offence. Jackson is more of the speed rusher, he has that burst that gets him around guys, while Lynch is more of the power back thats going to drag defenders for a couple of extra yards. I don't know why Bills fans always have to find something wrong with everything instead of appreciating what they have. Exactly correct - having two really good backs is a problem you need to have.
Syndrums Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 People forget that we have nothing behind Jackson and Lynch. We also have too many holes to fill so I'd rather not make another one we have to fill this offseason. That was the problem with Levy/Jauron...they created holes then filled holes and the holes that were open always stayed open. Lynch stays another year at least. One thing, and this is a big "If", but if Shanahan does decide to take the job, he has a nose for drafting RB talent, and a Late round Gem, ala Freddy Jackson could be in our future. It's hard to say Lynch will, 1. Keep his off season troubles in check, and 2. Stay healthy, neither of which he has done here yet.
Recommended Posts