Spiller not doing to Bad!!!

[SoggyHog]

After reading this thread, I've realized two things:

 

1. Spiller is doing just fine. People want to compare him to other players on other teams. You can't do that. Every team is different. Every situation is different. The only thing you can do is compare him to other players on the Bills. His numbers are VERY comparable to F. Jackson. Jackson's rushing yds is 4.1 per attempt compared to Spillers 3.8. Jackson has 7 TD's in the last 433 carries (1 TD per 62 carries), Spiller has 65 carries for 0 TD's. Jackson has 28 catches for 2 TD's (6.8yds/per) , Spiller has 22 for 1 (4.7yds/per). Jacksons career punt return navg is 14.2, Spiller 14.6. Jackson's kick return average is 22.2yds/per, Spiller is 24.3. So, the people bitching about Spiller should also be bitching about Freddy. Having a clone of Freddy on this team is good news for me! I'll take an entire team of them!

 

2. The people complaining about Spiller are not really complaining about Spiller. They are complaining about the Spiller PICK and how he's being used (or not used) in this offense. And they have the right too, however, the pick did make sense. They must have viewed him as the best player available and we all knew Marshawn was only one mistake away from a year off. Also, Spiller on this team made Lynch a trade candidate with a few games into the season. I'm guessing the FO knew this going into the draft. Why else did Marshawn start the first two games? A fourth rounder for Lynch was a steal for the Bills IMO. Sure, a number 9 pick is pretty high for a RB when we had other immediate needs, but it seems to me that winning immediately this year was not on the FO's mind during the draft.

 

Now, that being said, I did not like the pick at the time. I (like most fans) want to win now! However, I will take 4 wins this year with the project of building a playoff team in the near future as opposed to more 7-9 consecutive seasons! (if that project started this past April)

Edited December 21, 2010 by SoggyHog

[CosmicBills]

 

 

2. The people complaining about Spiller are not really complaining about Spiller. They are complaining about the Spiller PICK and how he's being used (or not used) in this offense. And they have the right too, however, the pick did make sense. They must have viewed him as the best player available and we all knew Marshawn was only one mistake away from a year off. Also, Spiller on this team made Lynch a trade candidate with a few games into the season. I'm guessing the FO knew this going into the draft. Why else did Marshawn start the first two games? A fourth rounder for Lynch was a steal for the Bills IMO. Sure, a number 9 pick is pretty high for a RB when we had other immediate needs, but it seems to me that winning immediately this year was not on the FO's mind during the draft.

 

No. It didn't make sense. That's the whole point. It was an absolute catastrophic f*&k-up that highlights an even bigger problem in the front office. One that no one is talking much about because they aren't seeing the forest through the trees. It's a problem that will set this team back another few years -- maybe longer. I said it when they made the pick and the actions after the fact have born out that truth.

 

Look at the evidence ... if they picked Spiller because they were afraid of losing Marshawn, that's fine. But then why didn't they trade Marshawn when his value was the highest? They could have moved him during the draft and paved the way for Spiller to get more reps in camp and the preseason and smooth his transition to the NFL. But they didn't. They kept Marshawn and, according to multiple reports, made no effort to move him during the pre season. Then, when GB, a legit super bowl contender got bit by the injury bug, Marshawn's value was at it's peak. Again, the Bills did nothing. They didn't act. Why? Many thought they were playing hardball. But then when they dealt Marshawn to the Seahawks for a sack of nickles and a couple of jock straps we learned that they hadn't even contacted the Packers about a deal. That's criminal by this front office and shows just how terribly managed this club is.

 

Still, even if you want to make the argument that hindsight is 20/20 and that maybe the Bills DID make efforts to move Marshawn earlier (which even the Bills denied at the time), you can't forgive how poorly managed Spiller has been since he's been on the team. I could forgive the pick, forgive the failure to get the best value for Marshawn, I could forgive all of that if Spiller was being properly developed. But he isn't. He gets less than 10 carries a game. Less than 15 touches a game. That's INSANE. It's poor management, poor coaching and poor development. That speaks to the bigger problem, the underlying one.

 

Namely, this front office, from Wilson to Nix on down, has no clue how to build a winning football team in the modern NFL. The winning teams know that the days of a workhorse RB are over. Anyone who takes a RB in the top 15 is living in the stone age. You need 2 RBs to maintain the workload in the NFL today. The shelf life of a modern RB is too short to risk only having one on your roster and it's too short to tie up a large amount of your cap space in one position. Teams have moved from high profile, top picks at RB who anchor their teams to finding CHEAPER, just as talented players in later rounds, free agency and off the scrap heap. Look at Hillis. Where did he come from? Freddie came from NFL Europe! MJD was a 2nd rounder. The fact that this new front office with it's first pick in a rebuilding year chose a RB at the number 9 pick was a clear sign that they don't have a clue. They're dinosaurs -- and not just because Nix is old. It's the mentality that's old. And it's a shame because it means with these jokers in charge, things aren't going to get better until they clean house AGAIN.

 

But let's, for the sake of argument, assume I'm wrong in that above statement. Let's assume that it's not dinosaur thinking to take a RB that high in the draft. There are exceptions to that of course, like if your team is just one player away from a legit Super Bowl run -- which clearly the Bills were not. Still, if you invest all that money and all those resources into a number 9 pick at RB then you have to play him. You just have to. The only way you don't play him is if he's a total bust and your team is in contention for the playoffs. The Bills were never in contention for the playoffs. They were never in contention for anything this year. Picking Spiller was bad. But sitting Spiller is criminal.

 

This is the bigger problem. It's not the pick itself, it's what the pick represents. It represents that the new front office of Nix and company are clueless as to how to build a winning football team. The way they handled the Trent situation, to the Spiller pick, to the Green signing, was an absolute embarrassment and gives me zero faith in their abilities to build a winning franchise.

 

THAT'S the problem that no one is talking about. The Spiller pick was just a symptom of a larger issue.

[SoggyHog]

No. It didn't make sense. That's the whole point. It was an absolute catastrophic f*&k-up that highlights an even bigger problem in the front office. One that no one is talking much about because they aren't seeing the forest through the trees. It's a problem that will set this team back another few years -- maybe longer. I said it when they made the pick and the actions after the fact have born out that truth.

 

Look at the evidence ... if they picked Spiller because they were afraid of losing Marshawn, that's fine. But then why didn't they trade Marshawn when his value was the highest? They could have moved him during the draft and paved the way for Spiller to get more reps in camp and the preseason and smooth his transition to the NFL. But they didn't. They kept Marshawn and, according to multiple reports, made no effort to move him during the pre season. Then, when GB, a legit super bowl contender got bit by the injury bug, Marshawn's value was at it's peak. Again, the Bills did nothing. They didn't act. Why? Many thought they were playing hardball. But then when they dealt Marshawn to the Seahawks for a sack of nickles and a couple of jock straps we learned that they hadn't even contacted the Packers about a deal. That's criminal by this front office and shows just how terribly managed this club is.

 

Still, even if you want to make the argument that hindsight is 20/20 and that maybe the Bills DID make efforts to move Marshawn earlier (which even the Bills denied at the time), you can't forgive how poorly managed Spiller has been since he's been on the team. I could forgive the pick, forgive the failure to get the best value for Marshawn, I could forgive all of that if Spiller was being properly developed. But he isn't. He gets less than 10 carries a game. Less than 15 touches a game. That's INSANE. It's poor management, poor coaching and poor development. That speaks to the bigger problem, the underlying one.

 

Namely, this front office, from Wilson to Nix on down, has no clue how to build a winning football team in the modern NFL. The winning teams know that the days of a workhorse RB are over. Anyone who takes a RB in the top 15 is living in the stone age. You need 2 RBs to maintain the workload in the NFL today. The shelf life of a modern RB is too short to risk only having one on your roster and it's too short to tie up a large amount of your cap space in one position. Teams have moved from high profile, top picks at RB who anchor their teams to finding CHEAPER, just as talented players in later rounds, free agency and off the scrap heap. Look at Hillis. Where did he come from? Freddie came from NFL Europe! MJD was a 2nd rounder. The fact that this new front office with it's first pick in a rebuilding year chose a RB at the number 9 pick was a clear sign that they don't have a clue. They're dinosaurs -- and not just because Nix is old. It's the mentality that's old. And it's a shame because it means with these jokers in charge, things aren't going to get better until they clean house AGAIN.

 

But let's, for the sake of argument, assume I'm wrong in that above statement. Let's assume that it's not dinosaur thinking to take a RB that high in the draft. There are exceptions to that of course, like if your team is just one player away from a legit Super Bowl run -- which clearly the Bills were not. Still, if you invest all that money and all those resources into a number 9 pick at RB then you have to play him. You just have to. The only way you don't play him is if he's a total bust and your team is in contention for the playoffs. The Bills were never in contention for the playoffs. They were never in contention for anything this year. Picking Spiller was bad. But sitting Spiller is criminal.

 

This is the bigger problem. It's not the pick itself, it's what the pick represents. It represents that the new front office of Nix and company are clueless as to how to build a winning football team. The way they handled the Trent situation, to the Spiller pick, to the Green signing, was an absolute embarrassment and gives me zero faith in their abilities to build a winning franchise.

 

THAT'S the problem that no one is talking about. The Spiller pick was just a symptom of a larger issue.

 

 

I agree with you to a point, however, you are not talking about Spiller (which is point of this thread) you are complaining about the pick and the ineptitude of the FO. I think what has most people (including you and me) in an uproar about is the wasting of a number 9 pick on a RB who is not touching the ball, when we didn't "need" a RB and we had/have needs elsewhere. However, my point was and is: he is having a very comparable year to the other running backs who are, and were, on this team. Regardless of where he was picked (and I know 9 was too high) he is having a decent year. He is a rookie on a 4 win team under a completely new coaching staff. It is going to take some time. I doubt most RB's in the league would produce much more on this team this year.

[CosmicBills]

I agree with you to a point, however, you are not talking about Spiller (which is point of this thread) you are complaining about the pick and the ineptitude of the FO. I think what has most people (including you and me) in an uproar about is the wasting of a number 9 pick on a RB who is not touching the ball, when we didn't "need" a RB and we had/have needs elsewhere. However, my point was and is: he is having a very comparable year to the other running backs who are, and were, on this team. Regardless of where he was picked (and I know 9 was too high) he is having a decent year. He is a rookie on a 4 win team under a completely new coaching staff. It is going to take some time. I doubt most RB's in the league would produce much more on this team this year.

But see, I think that you're standards are far too low. 9th pick or not, he is NOT having a good year as a RB. 1 TD, less than 500 yards rushing. That's JV numbers. RB is the position with the fastest learning curve. Players come right in from college and perform. Spiller hasn't.

 

Some of that is because he simply isn't seeing the field. Some is because he is having a tougher than normal time adjusting to life in the NFL. That's not opinion. That's the facts based on his production.

[DreReed83]

Nah... I would never say I "know" . I'll leave that to you. You can't back up what you're saying about Spiller as fact just the same. Not one thing you said proves that. Saying you know doesn't cut it. It's not a tough concept really... You organize a business plan within your organization to regain a measure of long term success. A draft pick comes a long that is a game-breaker whom you think will help you greatly as that plan comes to life, even though you already have a couple really good guys at his position. He is rated higher on your draft board by a mile than any other player thats up there still....so you take him. As you begin to implement season 1 of the plan, you are not too concerned with wether he is approved by fans with little to no attention span or long term view. You hope he gets in there, learns a little, get's used to the speed of the NFL. Your goal however is for him to be ready when your team is ready to make a run for real contention. And please don't generalize about my posts... I've seen hundreds of you come and go since the early days of this board. Move on to something else if my opinion or concept is too mindblowing for you to jive with. Opinions are encouraged here. So in saying that, I understand your 'opinion' and if you have nothing to add then just move on.

 

Yes, you leave that up to ME, because that logic is total BS. Coaches will ALWAYS put the best players on the field that put the team in the best position to win. They will NEVER hold out and put a good/great player on the bench for future purposes. That's mindblowing that you even think that.

 

Yes, you organize a plan to regain a measure of long term success. What does that have anything to do with sitting a "good" player on the bench? If you want a long term success and see one of your players as being a part of it, then you PLAY him and give him game EXPERIENCE. How is a player to get experience while rotting on the bench? Are u freakin kidding me? The best way to improve as a team is to grow as a team and PLAY. I know that logic is very difficult to you. More game time and playing time = experience and improvement. SHOCKER. I know. Stick with me though. I know this logic is probably hurting your head right about now.

 

Everything else you're babbling about doesn't make sense. The ONLY way to get better is game experience. Practice only gets you so far. Training camp only gets you so far. The only way to get better as a player is to play in a GAME. This doesn't help him at all.

 

And you wanna talk about saving him for the future? If that's the case, then Spiller has lost 2 years of game experience because most likely there won't be an NFL season next year because of the lockout. So he won't play next year either, and he'll come into his 3rd year rusty.

 

GOOD LOGIC

[djrocks]

Never draft a RB in the first round. You think our FO would get it after drafting Marshawn, Willis, Antoine Smith. Idiots

 

where would have drafted adrian peterson?

[CosmicBills]

where would have drafted adrian peterson?

I wouldn't have.

 

That's the point. The only time you draft a RB in the first round is if he's the missing piece for a Super Bowl run. You could argue he was a big boost for the Vikings. He's one of the best backs in the league. But how many Super Bowls have the Vikings won with him?

 

Yeah. RBs don't win Super Bowls anymore. This isn't the 80s. It's 2010. It's a pass first league now. You need to manage the cap and allocate more room for WRs, QBs, TEs, and Pass protectors (and conversely DBs and Pass Rushers) which limits the amount teams can afford to spend on RBs. Taking a RB in the first round, let alone HIGH in the first round means you're locking up a large portion of your cap to one player at one position that is quickly becoming a two man job. That's why it's far more prudent to find a RB anywhere BUT the first round since they're cheaper and easier to get away from when they get hurt or run out of tred on their tires.

 

The people that don't understand this are the old timers who don't understand that the game has changed in the past 5 to 10 years. Old timers like the ones running this team.

Edited December 21, 2010 by tgreg99

[T master]

Maybe on returns, but not many miss in the backfield.

 

Bellichick picked up a rookie RB out of the Jets training camp dumpster who is far outplaying our 1st round draft pick. 435 yards rushing (5.3 per) and 347 receiving (10.7) 5 TDs. Spiller's got 248 (3.9), 103 (4.7) and 1 TD.

 

Go figure.

 

DUH !!!! Established O line - Established #1 QB - Top Offense for years - Established Offensive scheme & personal -- Give ole Bellichek CJ with all he's got & see what he does with him & then put that up against Woodhead .

 

It's not at all fair when you compare a top 5 Offense to a coach coming in with a brand new Offensive scheme in his first year as this teams coach NO WAY can you compare the 2 that's just being foolish or having little or no common sense what so ever !!!!!!

 

THIS HAS TO BE THE WORST REPLY I'VE EVER READ ON HERE MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE WHAT SO EVER !!!!!!!

Edited December 21, 2010 by T master

[akm0404]

Spiller is a slot receiver or nothing in the NFL. Wait and see.

[Bill from NYC]

I wouldn't have.

 

That's the point. The only time you draft a RB in the first round is if he's the missing piece for a Super Bowl run. You could argue he was a big boost for the Vikings. He's one of the best backs in the league. But how many Super Bowls have the Vikings won with him?

 

Yeah. RBs don't win Super Bowls anymore. This isn't the 80s. It's 2010. It's a pass first league now. You need to manage the cap and allocate more room for WRs, QBs, TEs, and Pass protectors (and conversely DBs and Pass Rushers) which limits the amount teams can afford to spend on RBs. Taking a RB in the first round, let alone HIGH in the first round means you're locking up a large portion of your cap to one player at one position that is quickly becoming a two man job. That's why it's far more prudent to find a RB anywhere BUT the first round since they're cheaper and easier to get away from when they get hurt or run out of tred on their tires.

 

The people that don't understand this are the old timers who don't understand that the game has changed in the past 5 to 10 years. Old timers like the ones running this team.

 

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

[silvermike]

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

 

I think the biggest value for a great running back is when you can give the guy the ball on 3rd and 3, with a lead, in the 4th quarter, and know he's going to convert. You pass to get ahead, you run to finish the game. That's not the guy CJ Spiller is, sadly, though there are certainly important roles for him to play in the first three quarters. And we can worry about what we do with a lead in the 4th quarter when we keep having them. But I'm far more sympathetic to taking a power back in the first round than a speedy guy.

 

As to the weather, I used to agree with you, but I keep seeing QBs have great games in snowy conditions. I refuse to believe it's true, but I think QB arms are getting stronger, and fields are getting better, and the result is that speed offenses work better than ever before on cold days.

[CosmicBills]

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

I tend to agree with Mike below -- that the game has changed to such an extent that the weather isn't as big of a factor as it once was. Sure, it matters when there's a freak storm like Cleveland v Buffalo a few years ago. But that's rare. And besides, the Super Bowl is played in warm weather / no snow. And the point is to win the Super Bowl ...

 

But also, I don't mean to imply that RBs aren't important or that the running game itself is useless. It's just not AS important as it was for the first 60 plus years of the NFL. And, further more, the main point is that since RBs are a dime a dozen these days with teams not willing to spend huge chunks of their cap on them, you can find a very good, even great back, from anywhere. Throw a rock at the combine in April and you'll hit six or seven. Every year. So even if elements are more important than Mike and I are saying, which is very possible, you can still find a good enough back to win in the snow and rain without picking in the 1st round.

[34-78-83]

Yes, you leave that up to ME, because that logic is total BS. Coaches will ALWAYS put the best players on the field that put the team in the best position to win. They will NEVER hold out and put a good/great player on the bench for future purposes. That's mindblowing that you even think that.

 

Yes, you organize a plan to regain a measure of long term success. What does that have anything to do with sitting a "good" player on the bench? If you want a long term success and see one of your players as being a part of it, then you PLAY him and give him game EXPERIENCE. How is a player to get experience while rotting on the bench? Are u freakin kidding me? The best way to improve as a team is to grow as a team and PLAY. I know that logic is very difficult to you. More game time and playing time = experience and improvement. SHOCKER. I know. Stick with me though. I know this logic is probably hurting your head right about now.

 

Everything else you're babbling about doesn't make sense. The ONLY way to get better is game experience. Practice only gets you so far. Training camp only gets you so far. The only way to get better as a player is to play in a GAME. This doesn't help him at all.

 

And you wanna talk about saving him for the future? If that's the case, then Spiller has lost 2 years of game experience because most likely there won't be an NFL season next year because of the lockout. So he won't play next year either, and he'll come into his 3rd year rusty.

 

GOOD LOGIC

 

If it were coaches making all the decisions in the NFL there would be no such thing as long term planning. Coaches are only 'somewhat' involved in such thinking at best in general. Other than that, repeating what you already said isn't really adding anything here. Big picture scenarios are real things that Gm's and Owners employ throughout the NFL, regardless of the perspective of coaches and fans at times. I'm sorry you don't see the lack of concern for Spiller's immediate production coming from multiple angles within the organization. More of your "facts" you list are actually opinions just like everybody else. "Teams will NEVER Bla bla bla" whatever

[DreReed83]

If it were coaches making all the decisions in the NFL there would be no such thing as long term planning. Coaches are only 'somewhat' involved in such thinking at best in general. Other than that, repeating what you already said isn't really adding anything here. Big picture scenarios are real things that Gm's and Owners employ throughout the NFL, regardless of the perspective of coaches and fans at times. I'm sorry you don't see the lack of concern for Spiller's immediate production coming from multiple angles within the organization. More of your "facts" you list are actually opinions just like everybody else. "Teams will NEVER Bla bla bla" whatever

 

zzzzzzzzzzz...you still talkin? Sorry you can't see that Spiller isn't producing. And when he's a 3rd year veteran with half a year of game experience, that will be a huge step back in his development.

 

How many yds per carry did he average last time? 1.8 or something? 2.9 yds per carry the last 2 games? Around 4.1 yds per touch for the season on offense? Yup. I see potential there.

[34-78-83]

zzzzzzzzzzz...you still talkin? Sorry you can't see that Spiller isn't producing. And when he's a 3rd year veteran with half a year of game experience, that will be a huge step back in his development.

 

How many yds per carry did he average last time? 1.8 or something? 2.9 yds per carry the last 2 games? Around 4.1 yds per touch for the season on offense? Yup. I see potential there.

 

Yawn