cantstopbeastmode Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I feel like some of you guys undervalue him. I can only think of Peterson as being better than him. Please don't pull out stats. I know that "numbers don't lie," but they also don't tell the whole story. Please dont attempt to tell me Lynch would have the same stats if he was on the steelers, pats, etc. Where do you guys put him? I have him as 2nd best.
lets_go_bills Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I think Lynch is definately a top-5 back. My unofficial rankings: 1. Adrian Peterson 2. Michael Turner 3. Marshawn Lynch 4. DeAngelo Williams 5. Steven Jackson LT is bumped because of a bad year and I think he's done. His body doesn't have anything left.
loyal2dagame Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I think Lynch is definately a top-5 back. My unofficial rankings: 1. Adrian Peterson 2. Michael Turner 3. Marshawn Lynch 4. DeAngelo Williams 5. Steven Jackson LT is bumped because of a bad year and I think he's done. His body doesn't have anything left. if lynch is top 5, where does fred jackson rank. he is faster, more elusive and more explosive than lynch.. dont get me wrong, i think both are good, and important to the bills future, but imho from what we have seen, jackson is a better all around back than lynch. it's a great problem for the bills to have and even better for us to be able to discuss about who is the higher ranked top player for 2 bills players at the same position. how about pain and suffering for a combo nickname. lynch brings the pain with his beast mode. and jackson brings the suffering with his speed and elusiveness.
TheBlackMamba Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 1. All Day 2. Brian Westbrook 3. Stephen Jackson 4. Michael Turner 5. Marshawn Lynch Honorable mention: deangelo williams, chris johnson, brandon jacobs, marion barber, ronnie brown
mjohns85 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 ad is def all world, too bad he cant hold onto the ball. lynch is a beast and the backs i might consider taking over him would be ad and westbrook.
thebandit27 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 if lynch is top 5, where does fred jackson rank. he is faster, more elusive and more explosive than lynch.. dont get me wrong, i think both are good, and important to the bills future, but imho from what we have seen, jackson is a better all around back than lynch. it's a great problem for the bills to have and even better for us to be able to discuss about who is the higher ranked top player for 2 bills players at the same position. how about pain and suffering for a combo nickname. lynch brings the pain with his beast mode. and jackson brings the suffering with his speed and elusiveness. Jackson is not a better running back than Lynch. His per-carry production is higher because Lynch takes the Lion's share of the carries and takes most of the pounding. Jackson is probably effective enough to be a starter in the NFL, but there's no way he's done enough in his time here to warrant that kind of evaluation.
R. Rich Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 1. Lynch 2. Lynch 3. Lynch 4. Lynch 5. Beast Mode 6. Bills starting RB from Cal 7. Marshawn 8. Guy who goofed 'round and rode that cart in college game 9. Thomas Jones 10. Matt Forte
loyal2dagame Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Jackson is not a better running back than Lynch. His per-carry production is higher because Lynch takes the Lion's share of the carries and takes most of the pounding. Jackson is probably effective enough to be a starter in the NFL, but there's no way he's done enough in his time here to warrant that kind of evaluation. i'm not going to over argue my point of view other than to say, jackson IS faster, IS more elusive, DOES have better hands. as for jackson's per carry production, it was pretty good for the games lynch was hurt. how do you explain that? fluke? and as far as jackson's time here not warranting evaluation, people were calling lynch a top 5 back LAST YEAR, without his time here warranting that type of evaluation. i'm very happy the bills have both as the right combination of power and speed can carry an offense. see the pittsburgh steelers of the 90's.
Magox Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 ya but user VETERAN BILLS thinks he is the fifth best in the AFC east, you should listen to him, he knows on a more serious note, I would say 1. Peterson 2. Stephen Jackson 3. Westbrook 4. Turner 5. Lynch I think Lynch demonstrated his talent in the second half of the season
silvermike Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I hadn't seen it before this year, but DeAngelo Williams has become a monster down in Carolina. Averaging 5.5 yards per carry as a featured back is remarkable.
loyal2dagame Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 williams did quietly have a monster season. you didnt hear announcers/blowhards clammering for him, but he did his job well.
Guest dog14787 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I feel like some of you guys undervalue him. I can only think of Peterson as being better than him. Please don't pull out stats. I know that "numbers don't lie," but they also don't tell the whole story. Please dont attempt to tell me Lynch would have the same stats if he was on the steelers, pats, etc. Where do you guys put him? I have him as 2nd best. Lets just hope the perception of how good Marshawn Lynch is can be validated this coming up season. If Lynch is 2nd best RB in the AFC where does that put Freddie Jackson when many of us believe Freddie is just as good or better?
loyal2dagame Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 is there an echo here echo here echo here
thebandit27 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 i'm not going to over argue my point of view other than to say, jackson IS faster, IS more elusive, DOES have better hands. as for jackson's per carry production, it was pretty good for the games lynch was hurt. how do you explain that? fluke? and as far as jackson's time here not warranting evaluation, people were calling lynch a top 5 back LAST YEAR, without his time here warranting that type of evaluation. i'm very happy the bills have both as the right combination of power and speed can carry an offense. see the pittsburgh steelers of the 90's. I'm not sure what basis you have to say he's faster, do you know their 40 times? That'd be interesting to see. As for elusiveness, he may have that over Lynch. Hands? Lynch caught more balls for more yards and more touchdowns, in what I'm pretty certain (but can't confirm) was a similar number of targets, so that's certainly up for debate. I understand that Jackson was good in the game (not games) that he started when Lynch was hurt. Can he do it over a full season? We don't know yet, hence my comment about how he hasn't the resume to warrant that kind of evaluation. The comparison to Lynch's supposed top 5 ranking last year is misplaced, since Lynch started 15 games, which is significantly more time on which to base an evaluation than Jackson's 2 career starts. Nevertheless, I agree that having them both is a great situation.
Guest dog14787 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I'm not sure what basis you have to say he's faster, do you know their 40 times? That'd be interesting to see. As for elusiveness, he may have that over Lynch. Hands? Lynch caught more balls for more yards and more touchdowns, in what I'm pretty certain (but can't confirm) was a similar number of targets, so that's certainly up for debate. I understand that Jackson was good in the game (not games) that he started when Lynch was hurt. Can he do it over a full season? We don't know yet, hence my comment about how he hasn't the resume to warrant that kind of evaluation. The comparison to Lynch's supposed top 5 ranking last year is misplaced, since Lynch started 15 games, which is significantly more time on which to base an evaluation than Jackson's 2 career starts. Nevertheless, I agree that having them both is a great situation. How can you accurately compare stats like catches when Lynch is on the field 70% of the time? Just my opinion but Freddie Jackson is the better receiver.
bizell Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I hadn't seen it before this year, but DeAngelo Williams has become a monster down in Carolina. Averaging 5.5 yards per carry as a featured back is remarkable. while I think that Williams is a very good back, I can't help but wonder if Carolina's O-line is making Williams look better than he actually is. Jonathan Stewart had great numbers also.
BuffaloBill Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Jackson is not a better running back than Lynch. His per-carry production is higher because Lynch takes the Lion's share of the carries and takes most of the pounding. Jackson is probably effective enough to be a starter in the NFL, but there's no way he's done enough in his time here to warrant that kind of evaluation. I would agree ... don't get me wrong I think Jackson is a great compliment to Lynch but if you can only have one you take Lynch all day long. The reality is that the position mandates you have two good ones - those guys get pounded. It makes what Thurman did even more impressive but even he had Davis as a #2. I would actually advocate that there is a decent #3 on your roster because of the injury situation that is likely to happen every year. Seems like when these guys start going down physically it happens fast (ala LT). We are fortunate to have both in their prime.
Fewell733 Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 there are few i'd take over him. And he could be a lot better just through more experience - learning the running lanes. He's a faster Marion Barber in terms of style at this point.
loyal2dagame Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I'm not sure what basis you have to say he's faster, do you know their 40 times? That'd be interesting to see. As for elusiveness, he may have that over Lynch. Hands? Lynch caught more balls for more yards and more touchdowns, in what I'm pretty certain (but can't confirm) was a similar number of targets, so that's certainly up for debate. I understand that Jackson was good in the game (not games) that he started when Lynch was hurt. Can he do it over a full season? We don't know yet, hence my comment about how he hasn't the resume to warrant that kind of evaluation. The comparison to Lynch's supposed top 5 ranking last year is misplaced, since Lynch started 15 games, which is significantly more time on which to base an evaluation than Jackson's 2 career starts. Nevertheless, I agree that having them both is a great situation. you can see who is faster with how they run in the open field.......40 times mean little to how a player runs in full pads. jackson had 37 catches for 317 yards compared to lynch's 47 for 300. lynch was thrown to more.
Tcali Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I feel like some of you guys undervalue him. I can only think of Peterson as being better than him. Please don't pull out stats. I know that "numbers don't lie," but they also don't tell the whole story. Please dont attempt to tell me Lynch would have the same stats if he was on the steelers, pats, etc. Where do you guys put him? I have him as 2nd best. I love Marshawn--but you gotta be kiddin...
Recommended Posts