realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps? Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic.
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when dislike of the coaching staff bleeds into mindless bashing... Do you seriously mean to ask why they are playing the starting RB in a preseason game? The guy who will most likely start 12-13 of the season's games, and will need some work with his teammates before beginning his suspension? Think about that for a moment, then ask yourself if someone or something other than the Bills coaching staff appears mildly retarded.
realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 This, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when dislike of the coaching staff bleeds into mindless bashing... Do you seriously mean to ask why they are playing the starting RB in a preseason game? The guy who will most likely start 12-13 of the season's games, and will need some work with his teammates before beginning his suspension? Think about that for a moment, then ask yourself if someone or something other than the Bills coaching staff appears mildly retarded. If he was going to start the first 13 games, then I would play him. He'll need to work himself back into the rotation anyway when he comes back.
Band of Merriman Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. Uhmmm...yeah, I think your logic may be a little flawed. So you'd rather sit a RB that will be out the first 3 weeks of the regular season (I'm sure he won't be at all rusty from lack of game reps) so that he doesn't get injured (although he'd have a month to heal). You would rather risk giving even more reps to our RB's that we'll be counting on to actually contribute in those first 3 games and leave them open to injury where they might not be able to help us at all??? Sorry, but I think the staff made the right decision to play him the way the did, in limited fashion.
Band of Merriman Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 If he was going to start the first 13 games, then I would play him. He'll need to work himself back into the rotation anyway when he comes back. Really??? Work his way back into the rotation?? Unless he loses a limb during his suspension he moves right back in as the starter getting the bulk of the carries.
realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 We already know what Lynch can do and you are right, he can step back in and get the bulk of carries when he returns, so why risk injury now and risk him missing more games than 3. If he gets injured everyone will be agreeing with me.
Tcali Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. OKOK...You are just kidding.Pheww.I feel better about humanity now.
zazie Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. I do find the coaching staff mildly Palin... but not over this issue. He is going to get the bulk of the season work he needs some carries before even if he will have a month off between.
The Senator Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 I do find the coaching staff mildly Palin... but not over this issue. He is going to get the bulk of the season work he needs some carries before even if he will have a month off between. funny...most would describe the coaching staff as severely zazie
DCbillsfan Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. Dude he needs to get into playing shape. As you know there is a big difference between being in shape and football shape. He is not going to be that sharp that first week or two that he gets back. Not letting him play in the preseason would only compound the problem.
realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 Dude he needs to get into playing shape. As you know there is a big difference between being in shape and football shape. He is not going to be that sharp that first week or two that he gets back. Not letting him play in the preseason would only compound the problem. Child, please.
The Dean Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 If, in the remaining THREE preseason games, Jackson and Rhodes get minimal time with the first team, then you have a complaint. Right now is far too early to get your panties in a bunch.
realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 If, in the remaining THREE preseason games, Jackson and Rhodes get minimal time with the first team, then you have a complaint. Right now is far too early to get your panties in a bunch. Rhodes was returning kickoffs last night. What's up with that?
The Dean Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 Rhodes was returning kickoffs last night. What's up with that? Checking out all the options. Hall isn't likely to be on the Bills sideline this fall, while Rhodes will certainly be there to start the season. They need to see what he can contribute. Honestly, it sounds like you aren't familiar with what the preseason is used for. I don't think that's true, but I can't figure out why you are letting this stuff bother you.
realtruelove Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 Checking out all the options. Hall isn't likely to be on the Bills sideline this fall, while Rhodes will certainly be there to start the season. They need to see what he can contribute. Honestly, it sounds like you aren't familiar with what the preseason is used for. I don't think that's true, but I can't figure out why you are letting this stuff bother you. Because Rhodes has been in the league for 10 years. We all know he can return kicks. Why risk getting him hurt doing something we all know he can do? That's why I have a problem with this staff.
rstencel Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 Child, please. Guess this is what happens in old age. Get so senial dont understand logic when its presented anymore.
The Dean Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 Because Rhodes has been in the league for 10 years. We all know he can return kicks. Why risk getting him hurt doing something we all know he can do? That's why I have a problem with this staff. He has to get familiar with the blocking schemes (because of the new rules), too. I expect you will see all the regular returners get a couple of chances during the preseason, at some point. If he was returning all the kickoffs and punts, then I would question it. He returned 2 KO and 1 punt. Sounds about right, to me.
marauderswr80 Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 Then why play any starters? If anything Lynch should play more since hes gonna miss first 3 games. Remember a guy named Jason Peters who sat out all preseason and come back like week 2 and almost got our QB killed and pretty crapped the bed rest of the year?
sharper802 Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 the first three games. With our OL still coming together and Lynch not needing to play until week 4, why not let the RBs that are going to play get the reps?Am I the only one that thinks this coaching staff is mildly retarded? After watching Hard Knocks with the Bengals last week, I can only imagine being able to listen in to the jewels of wisdom our coaching staff comes up with to justify their logic. Retarded? Look in the mirror my friend...
iinii Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 Really??? Work his way back into the rotation?? Unless he loses a limb during his suspension he moves right back in as the starter getting the bulk of the carries. And that is why he is playing in the preseason! Tell it ......
Recommended Posts