Endzone Animal Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 The Bills save nearly $2 million at RB by cutting him. Being thin at that position makes it clear he was cut for non-football related reasons. He was not a 7th round pick hoping to impress, but a veteran that was supposed to shore up the position with Lynch out and Jackson as the only other qualified back. Omon is a totally unproven late pick, but he's cheap and that's what really matters with this group of losers, isn't it? 4-12 at best.
cantankerous Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 The Bills save nearly $2 million at RB by cutting him. Being thin at that position makes it clear he was cut for non-football related reasons. He was not a 7th round pick hoping to impress, but a veteran that was supposed to shore up the position with Lynch out and Jackson as the only other qualified back. Omon is a totally unproven late pick, but he's cheap and that's what really matters with this group of losers, isn't it? 4-12 at best. You think Dominic Rhodes would change that? LOL he makes no difference.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 I'm sure it had nothing to do with his piss poor play.
Endzone Animal Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 You think Dominic Rhodes would change that? LOL he makes no difference. Nope. They are a suck-ass team with or without him, only now just a little bit suckier. Ralph obviously knows they will suck and is just trying to save money as the ship is about to sink.
Alaska Darin Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Nope. They are a suck-ass team with or without him, only now just a little bit suckier. Ralph obviously knows they will suck and is just trying to save money as the ship is about to sink. Which certainly explains the decision to keep Denney and Kelsey. Retardia knows no consistency.
BillsVet Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Actually, cutting Rhodes is a slight departure for the franchise. I recall two years ago when the Bills chose to keep Anthony "Slow-train" Thomas and play him more than Fred Jackson. At the time though, AT played more because he had better pass pro skills whereas people didn't think Fred Jackson did. Hence, AT played more frequently. I'm concerned about Omon in pass protection, but he did outplay DR.
Endzone Animal Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Retardia knows no consistency. Look in the mirror, bub... Allen Wilson: But money may have been a bigger factor in Rhodes' release than his performance. The Bills save more than $2 million in cutting him. He was due to make base salaries of $750,000 this year and $1.25 million in 2010 as part of a two-year contract, which included a $200,000 signing bonus. He also was scheduled to get a $150,000 roster bonus by making the team. Cutting Rhodes is still a surprise because his departure leaves the Bills dangerously thin at running back. Xavier Omon, who appeared in only two games as a rookie last season, is the lone backup to Jackson for the first three games. Fullback Corey McIntyre, who re-signed in February, also made it even though the Bills don't use the fullback much in their no-huddle.
Malazan Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Can anyone point to prolonged stretches of good play from Rhodes? He didn't exactly have people beating down his door. If you want to take issue with the way things are run, that's fine. There's plenty of points you could make, but seriously, Rhodes? That's where you want to go?
TDO'Kearney Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Look in the mirror, bub... Allen Wilson: But money may have been a bigger factor in Rhodes' release than his performance. The Bills save more than $2 million in cutting him. He was due to make base salaries of $750,000 this year and $1.25 million in 2010 as part of a two-year contract, which included a $200,000 signing bonus. He also was scheduled to get a $150,000 roster bonus by making the team. Cutting Rhodes is still a surprise because his departure leaves the Bills dangerously thin at running back. Xavier Omon, who appeared in only two games as a rookie last season, is the lone backup to Jackson for the first three games. Fullback Corey McIntyre, who re-signed in February, also made it even though the Bills don't use the fullback much in their no-huddle. Just because Allen Wilson knows some details about Rhodes's contract doesn't make him right. The Bills have more young depth at DE than RB and as more than a few people pointed out before me, Kelsay is still here. Rhodes didn't impress in preseason, he got in a fight at camp, and he put the ball on the ground a couple of times. Hell, Michael Pittman is out there, maybe he's better. Rhodes didn't seem to have it anymore. I could be wrong about this but I don't even think AVP got a raise, so firing Schonert didn't cost a dime (other than the Bills won't get anything out of him).
apuszczalowski Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Look in the mirror, bub... Allen Wilson: But money may have been a bigger factor in Rhodes' release than his performance. The Bills save more than $2 million in cutting him. He was due to make base salaries of $750,000 this year and $1.25 million in 2010 as part of a two-year contract, which included a $200,000 signing bonus. He also was scheduled to get a $150,000 roster bonus by making the team. Cutting Rhodes is still a surprise because his departure leaves the Bills dangerously thin at running back. Xavier Omon, who appeared in only two games as a rookie last season, is the lone backup to Jackson for the first three games. Fullback Corey McIntyre, who re-signed in February, also made it even though the Bills don't use the fullback much in their no-huddle. Like people have said, if 2 players give you just about the same production, but cost different, which one do you cut? The guy making more. Omon didn't grossly outplay Rhodes or look like he could fight Lynch or jackson for the starting job, but he did play atleast as well as Rhodes, maybe a bit better. Rhodes looked like nothing special out there and his production in the preseason was not worth what he was being paid. But obviously "Ralph Cheap, Bills suck, Player just released/Cut was Pro Bowl worthy, The Bills are a joke of a franchise"
BillsWatch Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Look in the mirror, bub... Allen Wilson: But money may have been a bigger factor in Rhodes' release than his performance. Allen Wilson is SPECULATING not reporting. Some need to learn the difference between the two. It is like saying Allen Wilson's may be writing this because he picked him in his fantasy football writing or he may write for Buffalo News because Buffalo News does not pay enough for decent writers.
BillsZubaz Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Omon sucks. He can't run or block very well. In the two preseasons i have watched him he has not shown me any reason he should be on the 53 man roster. Now I'm not saying Rhodes was a hell of a lot better, but he was better than Omon. Rhodes is declining. Omon is on the upside. Rhodes fumbled several times this preseason and looked very average....they went with a younger talent...
Big Turk Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Perhaps the Bills saw, as did many of us, that Rhodes, much like A-Train when he was here, had his best days behind him. He wasn't fast, he wasn't quick, he was just another average back in the league. If you are gonna have an average back in the league on your roster, it might as well be the one who is young and learning and can get better rather than the one who is older, in decline and has nowhere to go but further down...
Alaska Darin Posted September 7, 2009 Posted September 7, 2009 Look in the mirror, bub... Allen Wilson: But money may have been a bigger factor in Rhodes' release than his performance. The Bills save more than $2 million in cutting him. He was due to make base salaries of $750,000 this year and $1.25 million in 2010 as part of a two-year contract, which included a $200,000 signing bonus. He also was scheduled to get a $150,000 roster bonus by making the team. Cutting Rhodes is still a surprise because his departure leaves the Bills dangerously thin at running back. Xavier Omon, who appeared in only two games as a rookie last season, is the lone backup to Jackson for the first three games. Fullback Corey McIntyre, who re-signed in February, also made it even though the Bills don't use the fullback much in their no-huddle. You sure showed me. Well, you showed me that Allen Wilson knows Rhodes' contract details. What you didn't prove was your point. The fact of the matter is if it was just about money then Copeland Bryan would be a BILL and Chris Kelsey wouldn't. That isn't the case. Dominic Rhodes didn't show any more than Xavier Omon (in fact, he actually showed a little less). If you can't beat out a younger, cheaper player on a new team then you're very likely going to be gone. Rhodes was NEVER the key to a successful season and when you factor in his poor performance both carrying and blocking with his contract number, it was a very easy decision. The fact that you are whining about him being cut for money shows what a pollyanna you are. I'm one of the first to criticize Ralph and his cheap ways (especially where coaching is concerned) but Dominic Rhodes career as a BILL ended way more because he sucked than any other reason.
Recommended Posts