The Dean Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 LJ to the Pats is bizarre, isn't it? The Pats need a RB, that's for sure.
Steely Dan Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Seriously--Omon as a back-up to Lynch, who already takes a pounding, is scary. I wonder if there's another RB in the deal. Maybe 3-way deal involving the Steelers and we get one of their back-up RB's? They may plan on running Corey McIntyre more?
Mark Vader Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 ecstatic? I didnt watch the preseason so I wouldn't know....But anyone out there!!--Did watching Omon out there in preseason make you ecstatic? I said the coaches, were ecstatic. And they were. I watched the preseason and thought Omon looked alright, but not yet ready to replace Jackson.
sullim4 Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 72.65.1.186 That's the IP of the wiki poster who "broke" this info. It's a Verizon IP issued to someone in Buffalo... hmm....
LABills08 Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 I am happy to trade Jackson for the right player. But, I can also see why a lot of Fans seem to be skeptical of a trade involving him. In reality I don't think the Bills will do it, simply because who will step in to fill his role? I doubt we will depend on a rookie who could be extremely good at some point, but remember he didn't even play against top competition in COLLEGE and he will be thrown into a nasty playoff race.
The Dean Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Everyone is assuming the tech geek at OBD was working on a Sunday and was the first one alerted to "the trade". I think not. It's Sunday, so I am almost absolutely certain a web-geek is working today. In fact, the Bills site gets updated 7 days a week.
bigbillsfan12 Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 I would like to have Gonzalez. I don't think giving up Jackson for him is a good idea though. I don't think Gonzalez's contribution to the offense would be greater than Jackson's. FJ has turned into one of my favorite players on the team, I don't think this pans out. It's not like TG is going to fill his role on special teams, considering the importance placed on ST by this coaching staff I can't see this happening. I would love to see FJ used as featured back for a couple of games just to see how productive he would be with this O line. I love ML but I'd like to see if it's him or the blocking thats the culprit in the Bills mediocre run game.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 The Pats need a RB, that's for sure. True; just can't picture LJ and his bad attitude in a Pats uniform. Randy Moss was another matter-- he's a guy who came in saying all the right things, wanting to win. LJ basically just wants the ball 30 times a game. Not sure that would fly in New England.
The Dean Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 True; just can't picture LJ and his bad attitude in a Pats uniform. Randy Moss was another matter-- he's a guy who came in saying all the right things, wanting to win. LJ basically just wants the ball 30 times a game. Not sure that would fly in New England. The New England Patriots* have become the House of Douchebags.
jwolf02 Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Like I said in the other thread, I don't see how trading Freddie for TG benefits us at all. Jackson has been a HUGE part of our successful start, and I'm not sold on the fact that what we gain going from Royal to Gonzalez outweighs what we lose in Action Freddie as a spark plug on offense and ST. He's been quite more impressive/valuable than Lynch this season IMO. EDIT: As Dean alluded to... what would the explanation be for Jackson being removed from the roster and depth chart if not for an unannounced trade?
murra Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 This is a lopsided trade, if it were not to be a rumor.
RayFinkle Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Like I said in the other thread, I don't see how trading Freddie for TG benefits us at all. Jackson has been a HUGE part of our successful start, and I'm not sold on the fact that what we gain going from Royal to Gonzalez outweighs what we lose in Action Freddie as a spark plug on offense and ST. He's been quite more impressive/valuable than Lynch this season IMO. don't worry, he wasn't.
bladiebla Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 For what it's worth this is what Wiki says:On October 12th, 2008, in a sudden turn of events, Fred Jackson has been sent to the Kansas City Chiefs packaged with a 3rd round draft pick for TE Tony Gonzalez. In addition RB Larry Johnson has been sent to the New England Patriots for undisclosed draft pick(s). Well, im calling shenigans. This is hot news on all Bills related msg boards and it's unregistered users making the edits on the Wiki. Sounds like trolling/puberal fun imho. I'm sticking to the front office broke the new website theory.
deep2evans Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Like I said in the other thread, I don't see how trading Freddie for TG benefits us at all. There's one thing to really like a guy and hope he doesn't get dealt, but this is ridiculous. If you can't see how getting TG wouldn't help our team, then I really don't know what to say. Our TEs are horrible.
davefan66 Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 I think it's a website issue; Darian Barnes was released and his page still exists: http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster/darian-barnes/ however Fred's page is gone: http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster/Fred-Jackson/. Assuming player status is linked in the new website from their personal pages I'm going to say someone goofed up in the website editor which caused his page to dissappear with a side effect of him dissappearing automaticlly from the roster etc. Maybe. But Oman is now listed as the second RB. Who do we have as a third RB? Assuming this "trade" went/goes through.... I do find it pretty odd Jackson is off the roster, regardless if he is involved in a trade or not.
Steely Dan Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 LJ to the Pats is bizarre, isn't it? Well the thing about this rumor is it makes a lot of sense. I think Edwards may be gone at the end of the year and I think they are going into major rebuilding mode. Getting a third round pick and FJ for Gonzalez helps them and keeps Gonzalez happy. Trading LJ to NE makes sense too because they'll probably pick up a 2nd rounder which will make their draft pretty heavy next year. It works good for the Bills and NE* because NE* needs a valid ground threat to keep the pressure off of Cassel. As for it being weird to see it changed on a Sunday night it is a holiday tomorrow so maybe the geek has the day off. I know I'm reaching but still.
murra Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Well, im calling shenigans. This is hot news on all Bills related msg boards and it's unregistered users making the edits on the Wiki. Sounds like trolling/puberal fun imho. I'm sticking to the front office broke the new website theory. I think it has to be shenanigans, this would have been reported already, NBC would be drooling over the opportunity to report it half time, so if it's not mentioned then, I will likewise call it fake.
The Dean Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 Well, im calling shenigans. This is hot news on all Bills related msg boards and it's unregistered users making the edits on the Wiki. Sounds like trolling/puberal fun imho. I'm sticking to the front office broke the new website theory. Very likely that you are correct. It could also, as I kind of stated earlier, be the website people working on several different scenarios, to be ready IN CASE a trade is made, and the wrong pages were made public.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 EDIT: As Dean alluded to... what would the explanation be for Jackson being removed from the roster and depth chart if not for an unannounced trade? BB.com website guy accidentally deleted Jackson when he meant to delete Barnes? Let's hope this is it.
murra Posted October 13, 2008 Posted October 13, 2008 BB.com website guy accidentally deleted Jackson when he meant to delete Barnes? Let's hope this is it. What a stretch. The website having no Jackson is the only reason I think it may be true, but I don't know why they would do that before it goes public.
Recommended Posts