CJ Spiller

[NewEra]

1324930647[/url]' post='2345883']

Really, your argument is based on a few friends opinions? My friends dont agree with you, so there you go, an equally pointless statement. Fact and truth is, he was not in the top 5 discussion for MVP when he got hurt. Case closed.

 

I love FJ as much as anyone, but he was not going to win the MVP nor was he even a serious candidate at the time of his injury. This team and offense was no where near the same team when he was hurt that it was when his name was briefly thrown out as a dark horse MVP (mostly by Bills fans).

 

Yep. My friends make your statement incorrect. You said, the only people that considered FJ a top 5 MVP candidate were bills fans. My friends hate the bills and thought he was a top 5 MVP candidate... So, you're wrong. Get over it. I refuse to even debate this with you any further since you have absolutely nothing that you can say to dispute it. You're 100% incorrect. I never said he would win the MVP. None of us did. We said he was deserving of candidacy. He was. You disagree. You're up entitled. Don't say the only people who saw him in that light, were Bills fans, unless you'd like to be wrong. You are. Cry about it more IMO. Make up something. You're still wrong. Mmk thanks.

 

1324952308[/url]' post='2346071']

Posters are arguing two different things. When the Bills were 5-2 and still the talk of the league, Freddy was definitely an MVP candidate and it was even stated in the national media, although at any point in the season Aaron Rodgers was the clear and really only choice for the award. Fred Jackson got hurt early in the 10th game. The shine had worn off on the Bills season and as one of the teams to beat by then. The Bills were 5-4 at the beginning of the game and to be 5-5 by the time it was over. Even though Jackson was leading the NFL in rushing at that point, he was no longer a serious MVP candidate, and Alphadawg was clear to point out each time he mentioned it "at the time of his injury he was not an MVP candidate", which was true. He was a legitimate candidate two weeks earlier though, after about half the season.

 

Ok, so let's get this straight. In Week 10 of the nfl season, how many players that are in the "top 5" of the MVP candidacy are serious candidates? Maybe 2-3? Was tyrann Mathieu really a "serious candidate" for the heisman? No, but he was a finalist. He was one of the best players in the nfl at the time of his injury...if he didn't get injured, there was a good chance he would be all nfl 1st team RB. Is that not good enough? Wtf are you people trying to argue????

[Kelly the Dog]

 

Ok, so let's get this straight. In Week 10 of the nfl season, how many players that are in the "top 5" of the MVP candidacy are serious candidates? Maybe 2-3? Was tyrann Mathieu really a "serious candidate" for the heisman? No, but he was a finalist. He was one of the best players in the nfl at the time of his injury...if he didn't get injured, there was a good chance he would be all nfl 1st team RB. Is that not good enough? Wtf are you people trying to argue????

I really wasn't arguing anything, I was pointing out what I thought was the disconnect of the argument between other posters. In week 5-7 Fred Jackson was being discussed as an MVP candidate. In week 9 or 10 before his injury, he really wasn't anymore because the team fell apart. You get no argument from me, I think he was the best RB in the league when he got hurt and I agree with you that he likely would have been first team all-pro, or second team.

[NoSaint]

First, I have to ask what the identity of this team is moving forward. Spiller is looking like a nice player, but is this a run first or pass first offense? It doesn't seem like either at this point late into the second season of rebuilding. People here talk up Gailey all the time, but what does this team do well that you can point to and say they're good at? If they're a pass first team, well, now they appear to have two good backs and a mediocre QB. If they're run first, Gailey throws it a lot and abandons the run when things aren't going well or they get one or two scores down.

 

And furthermore, when a team thinks it's rebuilding, just drafting good players isn't enough. Personnel then becomes more targeted and tailored to your team's identity. I just don't get the feeling Buffalo is developing anything than just trying to find players rather than identifying what they want to be. Spiller is an example of that.

 

Currentlyly I'd say it's a ball control offense trying to find guys in space to make a play. That can be run or pass. We don't stretch the field vertically as much as horizontally and hope that in those lanes we create that a move or well place block springs an athlete to make a play with the ball in his hands.

 

What's hard is we are still working on getting the talent level up and are hardpressed to stretch the field deep with our qbs arm, lines blocking or receivers speed which would help immensely.

Edited December 27, 2011 by NoSaint

[NewEra]

1324967921[/url]' post='2346189']

I really wasn't arguing anything, I was pointing out what I thought was the disconnect of the argument between other posters. In week 5-7 Fred Jackson was being discussed as an MVP candidate. In week 9 or 10 before his injury, he really wasn't anymore because the team fell apart. You get no argument from me, I think he was the best RB in the league when he got hurt and I agree with you that he likely would have been first team all-pro, or second team.

 

Edited December 27, 2011 by NewEra

[Doc]

It's semantics. If anyone is truly the MVP, it's Peyton Manning. To go from 10 straight seasons of double digit wins to 2 wins...

 

Fred was MVP worthy. Whether he was truly considered a candidate is a matter of conjecture because we don't know what the MVP choosers were thinking.

[Bill from NYC]

I said he was the top player available. I said he was a breakaway threat on a team that had no speed or stars. That is the justification for the pick.

 

You left out the part about selling tickets. Was this an oversight, or do you think that selling tickets (more money for RW) had nothing to do with Spiller being selected at #9 as a situational running back?

[Kelly the Dog]

You left out the part about selling tickets. Was this an oversight, or do you think that selling tickets (more money for RW) had nothing to do with Spiller being selected at #9 as a situational running back?

I would bet anything that selling tickets had absolutely nothing to do with CJ Spiller being picked at #9. I imagine that 90% of all Bills fans had rarely if ever heard of him before the draft, or knew very little about him.

 

I also completely reject the idea of "situational running back" which I think is entirely misleading and neither Nix nor Gailey nor anyone connected with the Bills ever thought of him like that. I think the intention from day one, and to this day, and into the near and far off future, was to eventually get Spiller 15-25 touches a game, be they carries, catches out of the backfield, or returns.

 

25 would be a ton, and while fans always say stuff like good RBs carry 25 times a game or I want my back getting 25 carries a game, hardly any backs ever average 25 a game. Hardly any get 25 touches including receptions. 15-25 touches a game, to me, means 10-20 carries, 3-7 passes, and 3-4 returns. 15-25 touches is way more than any WR or TE in the league, and more than 90% of the running backs in the league, regardless of whether or not he is a "workhorse" running back or "every down" running back.

 

He was having trouble with some of the offense, so I think they took him away from returns temporarily (and he also wasn't setting the return game on fire), not to mention we already had Roscoe, McKelvin, Brad Smith and now Rodgers to do those duties. So those 15-25 touches, for the time being anyway, may be more like 12-20 touches because there are no returns, although he was in their earlier in the year before he had to start.