Gugny Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 He had one good run against one of the worst teams in football. Big deal. Fred Jackson should still get more carries, but I agree that the team needs 2 good RBs.
BillnutinHouston Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Note to Marshawn - just hit the hole. In case you've forgotten how to do this, watch Freddie.
ChevyVanMiller Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I'm not suggesting that the Bills trade Lynch, but Jackson should get the lion's share of the carries. I don't think Lynch is even close to being the talent that FJ is. Jackson sees holes, makes cuts and has a "Thurman-like" ability to turn sideways and pick up an extra three yards as tacklers close in on him. Lynch is nowhere near the player he was two years ago. Beast Mode is least mode. Give me Freddie with the rock all day long!
Alaska_Darin_Is_Gay Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Lynch broke off a 47 yard run through a gigantic seam in the one of the worst defenses in the NFL. He's awesome. He's irreplaceable.
BillsfaninFl Posted December 14, 2009 Author Posted December 14, 2009 I'm not suggesting that the Bills trade Lynch, but Jackson should get the lion's share of the carries. I don't think Lynch is even close to being the talent that FJ is. Jackson sees holes, makes cuts and has a "Thurman-like" ability to turn sideways and pick up an extra three yards as tacklers close in on him. Lynch is nowhere near the player he was two years ago. Beast Mode is least mode. Give me Freddie with the rock all day long! No argument from me. I consider Fred our starting running back.
Cotton Fitzsimmons Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Freddie comes to us undrafted and Lynch costs a #12 overall pick. And the consensus is Fred is the better back. Amazing really... simply amazing.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 After last week, when Marshawn got his longest run of the season, people were still calling for his head on a platter. Today, he went out and pulled off the longest run (47 yards) the Bills had all season. He had 84 yards on only 12 carries. You need two good running backs on your team in today's NFL. We have them. It is the only position where we are rock solid. Why on earth would we want to get rid of one of them? Did you watch that play or just look it up in the box score? You do realize that the reason Lynch was able to get that run was becuase of a incredible block by Fitz right. I mean the whole field was wide open. Just about any RB on our team would have had at least that many yards on that play...it wasnt becuase of Lynch. Not saying Lynch isnt any good, but he managed only 35 yards the rest of the day on 11 more carries for an average of a measly 3.1 yards per carry. So, lets not get ahead of ourselves here. Jackson still had a much better all around day while Lynch had one carry that was a wide open side of the filed thanks to a great block by Fitz that any of our RB's would have gotten. In fact, Freddie probably gets more yards as he is faster. After that, he struggled with a measly 3.1 ypc average the rest of the day...
lets_go_bills Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Did you watch that play or just look it up in the box score? You do realize that the reason Lynch was able to get that run was becuase of a incredible block by Fitz right. I mean the whole field was wide open. Just about any RB on our team would have had at least that many yards on that play...it wasnt becuase of Lynch. Not saying Lynch isnt any good, but he managed only 35 yards the rest of the day on 11 more carries for an average of a measly 3.1 yards per carry. So, lets not get ahead of ourselves here. Jackson still had a much better all around day while Lynch had one carry that was a wide open side of the filed thanks to a great block by Fitz that any of our RB's would have gotten. In fact, Freddie probably gets more yards as he is faster. After that, he struggled with a measly 3.1 ypc average the rest of the day... Any good run starts with a good block. There has never been a good run in the history of the NFL that didn't involve at least one good block. Jackson is the better back but Lynch is good and we need him.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Any good run starts with a good block. There has never been a good run in the history of the NFL that didn't involve at least one good block. Jackson is the better back but Lynch is good and we need him. Dont get me wrong, you are totally correct about good blocking. All I was saying is that Lynch didnt do anything that one of our other RB's wouldnt have done on that play. In other words, that play would have happened if it were Freddie in there or even Oman. The whole side of the field was wide open after Fitz made the block. Moorman could make that play. The OP made reference to that play as a reason to prop up Lynch as if he made some great play. He truthfuly struggled all day except that play avg 3.1 ypc the rest of the day, but that play wasnt becuase of Lynch's skills, it was a play made possible becuase of an amazing play by Fitz.
BillsfaninFl Posted December 14, 2009 Author Posted December 14, 2009 Freddie comes to us undrafted and Lynch costs a #12 overall pick. And the consensus is Fred is the better back. Amazing really... simply amazing. Same story with Jason Peters. Keep in mind that there are a lot of good players that are undrafted, now that they only go seven rounds. Years ago, several more rounds were used.
Beebe's Kid Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I don't want to trade Lynch, but I think there are valid responses to your two points. First, playing well is not a reason to not want to trade him. After all, buy low and sell high is the most basic principle of business. Second, you might need two backs to succeed in the NFL, but you don't need two backs of the quality of Lynch and Jackson. And if you have a surplus that is being used inefficiently at one position and deficits at so many others, it makes sense to try to reallocate your resources. BTW, here are the YPC of the top two backs on the four best teams in the NFL: Minnesota: Peterson 4.5, Taylor 3.8 Indianapolis: Addai 3.7, Brown 4.5 New Orleans: Bell 4.2, Thomas 5.3 San Diego: Tomlinson 3.2, Sproles 3.3 I'm not sure how good any of those backs are, outside of Peterson. The answer to the quality question is no. That no is more resounding when you have Favre, Manning, Brees, or Rivers as your QB. We have Fitzy, a quitter, and the practice squad cast away, who has a ton of potential, but we can't let him play. Reallocation is not necessarily valid in our particular instance. I agree if we had two 24 year old stud running backs...we don't. Jackson is getting older, and will be past normal RB prime inside of 2 years. Lynch is 23. I see that it has been stated we are set at WR...far from it. If Owen's leaves, and the whiz-bangs at 550 are ready to drive him to the airport, along with half of the posters at TBD, including those that were riding his pee-pee after the 'Phins game, we are hurting and hurting bad. Reed is old...and worse yet, free-agent old. Roscoe is a broken man, and although I would like to think I could make him a useful piece of an offense (I have very strong Madden credentials!) he is not going to work out. Evans is a stud, albeit a micro-mini-stud with a rocket in his arse, but he is a stud. Steve Johnson is going to be busy with book signings and cleaning his HOF bust, and may not have time to be the savior he once was, and Hardy is still the same slow, bad hands, can't run a route Hardy he was last year...only he hasn't played competitive football in a year.... Freddie can catch the ball...does he help us with the slot WR? Why the f#@k not? I think he moves to WR when Lynch is in the game, which is the majority, and we win. One or the other is pointless.
Mr. WEO Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 You better tell the rest of the NFL that to because they seem to think so. If we didn't have all those injuries we would be at the top of the division even with captain checkdown at QB but I don't expect you guys to admit this. That would mean we actually had a decent team this year and our only true problem is our strength and conditioning coach. Granted there was lots of room for improvement but there is on any team. Enough with these "all these injuries" post. Put Ellison, McKelvin, Fine, Mithell, Schouman, Butler and Hardy back in the lineup and what do you have???? The 2008 Buffalo Bills, who lost 8 of their last 10 games. We aren't the injured Steelers or Giants. Stop.
UConn James Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Because backups can be found in later rounds. Unless they are Peterson, RB's are a dime a dozen. Which is also why we'd get diddly in return for Lynch. Teams don't want a 3rd-4th year guy when the average RB's career in the NFL is just under 2 seasons. It's the nature of the position --- getting absolutely pummeled by 5-6 guys for 25-35 times per game --- that most guys don't last long. It's what makes Emmitt and Thurman's careers so remarkable. Not to mention the legal troubles and middling production.
manbeast Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Enough with these "all these injuries" post. Put Ellison, McKelvin, Fine, Mithell, Schouman, Butler and Hardy back in the lineup and what do you have???? The 2008 Buffalo Bills, who lost 8 of their last 10 games. We aren't the injured Steelers or Giants. Stop. A much better team than we have now. Schouman was looking pretty damn good as well as Butler. Mckelvin makes our special teams better and he is a better corner than Florence and an O-line needs time together to get better even the S**t line we have now is getting better you can say what you want but our running game was better and our check down bull sh*t passing game was better. Mainly Butler Schouman and McKelvin are the ones I'd want back and don't forget the guys who have been injured that are not on IR.
stuckincincy Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Which is also why we'd get diddly in return for Lynch. Teams don't want a 3rd-4th year guy when the average RB's career in the NFL is just under 2 seasons. Not to mention the legal troubles and somewhat-middling production. I think Lynch is an ok NFL back. Fair hands IMO. Blocking - I dunno. He'd get a roster spot on all other teams. A thousand yards isn't much over 16 games, I know. His legal troubles - small peanuts IMO - he's young and that young people are goofy - especially with big jingle in the pocket - is well-known. That's part of being young. I do believe that he was drafted to gin up fan support, though. It's an old formula - a spiff RB excites, and sells tix. I would not trade him.
Magox Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Hardy is still the same slow, bad hands, can't run a route Hardy he was last year...only he hasn't played competitive football in a year.... Just wanted to comment on your Hardy statement..... Slow? He ran a 4.49 in the combine. Check it out. That's not just fast, but for a guy 6' 5 1/2" that like VERY VERY fast. Bad hands? I'm not going to take the time to look it up but he was "credited" with either 1 or 2 drops last year. Can't run routes? Got me there, but that was his ROOKIE YEAR because in college he was instructed not to improvise his routes no matter what. He's learning that now and IMO if he had some quality offensive people in his corner, instead of Jauron and Fewell he'd have had a lot more opportunities to learn than he's had.
DrDawkinstein Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 lynch is good, jackson is good. we need them both. jackson will only be in this league a couple more years. lynch can potentially last much longer. they are both Bills, and they are both rare bright spots on this team. enough with the hating. just be glad we have both of them.
mrags Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I totally agree, the idiotic morons on this board that were calling for the Bills to trade Lynch, don't know their asses from a hole in the ground, or much about football. Watching the last two games, Lynch and Jackson complement each other well, one of the few positions we don't have to worry about upgrading on this team. With our two backs, we probably have one of the top 3 or 4 RB tandems in the league, you can't say that about any other position on this team, even WR where we thought we did, but how has that panned out? Dolphins Ravens Steelers Jags Titans Chargers Cowboys Giants Eagles Vikings Falcons Panthers Saints Its funny that every one of the teams I just mentioned have probably better RB teams/tandems then Lynch and Jackson. Im not looking up stats based on teams in the NFL. It would most likely show more teams then who I just pointed out anyway. But that is besides the point. The issue that was under argument before wasnt if Lynch sucks, it was if Jackson is better. That has been proven this season as Jackson has taken a hold of the starting position and Lynch continues to run in ways he was not intended. Like trying to juke that defender yesterday. He is a small power back and should run that way. Not dance around the line like a wanna-be Barry Sanders. He is not good enough to find the hole and not small enough to fit in it even if he did. I personally like Jackson more then Lynch as many seem to be jumping on that bus, but I still like Lynch for what he is. But he needs a RB coach in a bad way to tell him what he should and should not be doing when hes on the field. However the real issue with Lynch is going to be if he can stay out of trouble, which he has proved he cannot in the offseason. Its a fact!!! If the dumb F*&K cant stay out of trouble I dont want him. He does nothing for this team if he is suspended for 8 games or the entire season after getting caught doing something dumb again. Someone already posted that RB's are a dime a dozen. Especially dumb ones that are supposed to be power backs but try and dance around like something they are not. We could pick up a rookie in the 4th round to do what he does. With all that said, I still like him and if he can keep out of trouble im still happy hes on this team.
loyal2dagame Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 lynch is good, jackson is good. we need them both. jackson will only be in this league a couple more years. lynch can potentially last much longer. they are both Bills, and they are both rare bright spots on this team. enough with the hating. just be glad we have both of them. i for the life of me can not understand why alot of posters keep saying jackson is old or will only be around for a few more years. the guy does not have the normal wear and tear that running backs that entered the nfl at age 22-23 have at 29. why is that so hard to get? everybody talks about jackson like he's been in the nfl for 7 years. i dont think we can fairly compare jackson's wear to a typical nfl runningback
Recommended Posts