Jump to content

Getting Rhodes Was Really Stupid


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I know that Lynch will be gone for a few games.

I know that we will need depth at RB.

I know that D.Rhodes is a quality verteran, who in case of injuries could start for a while.

 

I also know...

 

In a few games Lynch will be back.

Fred Jackson KICKS ASS!

If we can't afford luxary items like Parrish( who IMO is extrememly valuable), then why the hell can we afford what will soon become the best THIRD string back in the league?

D. Rhodes also wants playing time(can't blame him) but in only a few games we will wont have enough carries for 3 starting caliber RB's.

 

 

Why didn't we just suck it up and tried to go with Jackson as starter, and maybe Oman or someother cheap player as backup? It will only be for a max 3 games. I really wish we had just given Jackson a fair raise with the money that we spent on Rhodes.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like Rhodes, it's just that RB is already possibly our deepest position!

 

This is quite literally the dumbest post I've ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right, Rhodes is a good player. In fact, I would probably have him over Fred Taylor, but my argument is that we have more important needs.

 

What's wrong with letting Jackson get 90% of the carries the first few games and draft some kid in the later rounds to back him up?

 

I think that would decrease Jackson's effectiveness. Plus, Jackson probably splits return duties with McKelvin if/when Parrish is traded. Getting Rhodes obviously helps in the first 3 games, but also allows Jackson to be used more situationally and on returns. In addition, I think Lynch doesn't run hard all the time especially early in the season to save himself for later in the season. Two work-horse backs like Lynch and Rhodes with an all-purpose guy like Jackson is almost an ideal backfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but anyone could get hurt. Does Jackson have an injury history? I don't remember that being an issue for him.

 

Also, I think that Xavier is better than most people think.

Remember how many yards he got in college.

Why do people fall in love with and want to put EVERY Bills player in the HOF ... Xavier is a nice story, but he hasn't proven squat in this league, and if Freddy Jackson gets hurt, I'm in no mood to have to find out.

 

Yeah, getting proven players and upgrading the talent on this team really pisses me off too! :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting Rhodes wasn't stupid, your post claiming that is what is stupid-and might be the dumbest post that I have ever seen on TBD. Fred Jackson has kicked ass in what-2 games maybe? And he got stuffed at the Goal Line in each of those two games. Actually over that past week, they Bills have made the two smartest moves they have made all off season-getting Rhodes and dumping Peters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all agree that we'd rather have Fred Jackson in there. There's only one problem..... HE'S NOT UNDER CONTRACT!

 

For whatever reason, the Bills haven't offered him a long term deal, and he is upset and won't sign the 1 year tender.

 

As of right now, going into the first 3 games of the season, Xavier Omon is the starter... with no backups.

 

You sign Rhodes as insurance that this Jackson ordeal doesn't go the route Peters' went. Maybe the Bills don't want to sign Jackson to a long term deal. Rhodes is signed for two years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bills will either A) cut Rhodes after Lynchs suspension is up, or B) Trade Jackson after Lynchs suspension is up

 

They won't do A. Rhodes is a vet and therefore if he is on the roster for game 1, the Bills are on the hook for his entire seasons salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...