Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Fun fact about Fournette: he's not that old. (28) It only seems like he's been in the NFL forever.

 

What about Murray?

I'm playing Fournette over Murray but it's still Cook and Johnson in the pecking order. Glad he got some carries last night.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TFBillsfan said:

What’s crazy is he’s only 28. 

What!? It seems like he should be 34 or something.

12 minutes ago, Kaenon said:

How many fumbles does Cook have in his career?

 

Only 1 last year, first play of his career.

4 this year, but only 2 before last night's game.

That's a lot.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

I like the "heavy" personnel of Diggs/Knox/Kincaid/Cook/Fournette

 

I also like the spread personnel of Diggs/Kincaid/Shakir/Cook/(Gabe or other)

 

They can be so creative with these guys and effectively keep a defense off balance/control the clock.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
6 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

Unlikely, Johnson is the better player and he was missed yesterday.

Incorrect.  Fournette is the better player.  The reason he wasn't called up until yesterday is you can only call up a player 3 times before having to make him active.  They will use all 3 call ups with yesterday's call up and the next 2 weeks.  Come playoff time, if we make it, there are no call up rules.

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Hebert19 said:

He will be active rest if way. Key here. 4 career fumbles. Ya you read that right. He has only fumbled 4 times. Plus he has big game experience and is a great receiver and blocker.

 

While I wouldn't be opposed to Fournette being active the rest of the way, he was only active because Ty Johnson was hurt.

 

When Johnson is ready, he'll be active. He's impressed both on Offense and Special Teams. Yes, I know Fournette was returning kicks. But Johnson is a down field gunner and blocker - which is more important.

 

6 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

I don't care if Johnson is active.  I would sit Sherfield before Fournette.  

 

Yeah, that's not how it works. You don't sit a WR, which would bring us to 4 total WR's active to activate a 4th RB. 

 

The bottom line is Johnson is active before Fournette and we're not going to have 4 RB's active. 

 

If you wanted to make an argument that Fournette should play instead of Murray, it's something i'd consider. But that's unlikely as he's the best pass blocking RB and is consistently the lead guy pushing Josh into the End Zone.

 

Only way I see Fournette active is if there's an injury to Cook, Murray, or Johnson.

  • Simon changed the title to Playoff Lenny should be active rest of year...
Posted
1 hour ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

While I wouldn't be opposed to Fournette being active the rest of the way, he was only active because Ty Johnson was hurt.

 

When Johnson is ready, he'll be active. He's impressed both on Offense and Special Teams. Yes, I know Fournette was returning kicks. But Johnson is a down field gunner and blocker - which is more important.

 

 

Yeah, that's not how it works. You don't sit a WR, which would bring us to 4 total WR's active to activate a 4th RB. 

 

The bottom line is Johnson is active before Fournette and we're not going to have 4 RB's active. 

 

If you wanted to make an argument that Fournette should play instead of Murray, it's something i'd consider. But that's unlikely as he's the best pass blocking RB and is consistently the lead guy pushing Josh into the End Zone.

 

Only way I see Fournette active is if there's an injury to Cook, Murray, or Johnson.

Says who?  We don't need any set amount of position.  We have three TEs that can also be receivers.

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

Says who?  We don't need any set amount of position.  We have three TEs that can also be receivers.

 

History. 7 years of personnel lineups; a leopard doesn't change it's spots.

 

Under McDermott, we've never had 4 RB's active at one time. We've never carried less than 5 WR's active at one time.

 

And when running 4 WR sets, there would be no one getting a break and no one coming off the bench in case of injury. One WR goes down on the Outside and we'd have to run a slot WR on the Outside.

 

It's common sense. The 3rd RB barely gets any carries as is. So why would we put ourselves in an untenable situation in the event of an injury at WR for a 4th?

Edited by BillsFanForever19
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

History. 7 years of personnel lineups; a leopard doesn't change it's spots.

 

Under McDermott, we've never had 4 RB's active at one time. We've never carried less than 5 WR's active at one time.

 

And when running 4 WR sets, there would be no one getting a break and no one coming off the bench in case of injury. One WR goes down on the Outside and we'd have to run a slot WR on the Outside.

 

It's common sense. The 3rd RB barely gets any carries as is. So why would we put ourselves in an untenable situation in the event of an injury at WR for a 4th?

We don't use the 5th receiver other than special teams.  Your statement of we never do it is a weak conversation.  McDermott has never fired a Coordinator mid season.  Brady also was never the coordinator before the past few games.  I say best people are made active.  Also with 3 TEs, Cook lining out side some at times all we really need is 3 wrs.  Also before McDermott you would have said we couldn't run a defense with just 2 LBs but here we are.  The scheme will be adjusted to the best personnel

Edited by Billzgobowlin
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

We don't use the 5th receiver other than special teams.  Your statement of we never do it is a weak conversation.  McDermott has never fired a Coordinator mid season.  Brady also was never the coordinator before the past few games.  I say best people are made active.  Also with 3 TEs, Cook lining out side some at times all we really need is 3 wrs.  Also before McDermott you would have said we couldn't run a defense with just 2 LBs but here we are.  The scheme will be adjusted to the best personnel

 

As it stands, the 3rd most used RB on a given week is given extremely low snap counts. vs. The Chargers - James Cook had 41 snaps, Leonard Fournette had 10 snaps, and Latavius Murray had 7 snaps. A 4th RB? Maybe a couple snaps? Meanwhile, Trent Sherfield was used (albeit primarily as a blocker) in formations at WR in 33 snaps. Double the amount of snaps RB's 2 and 3 combined got.

 

There is ZERO chance they'd utilize a 4th RB and short themselves to 4 WR's. 

Edited by BillsFanForever19
  • Agree 1
Posted

I’m just glad we have him.  
 

If things ain’t going right with Cook you can just mix it up with Lenny.  He can give us some juice.  Haven’t seen much out of Murray in weeks.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

I’m just glad we have him.  
 

If things ain’t going right with Cook you can just mix it up with Lenny.  He can give us some juice.  Haven’t seen much out of Murray in weeks.  

 

 

He doesn't bring any Juice.  

 

If you need 4 yards he can get you 4........if you need 5......he can get you 4.  

 

That's who he is......whether it's in the regular season or the playoffs..........4 yards per carry career........which is below league average per carry fwiw.  

 

 

Edited by BADOLBILZ
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...