PDaDdy

Many have said it but personally I'm glad as hell we have both. I kind of look at Lynch and Jackson this way. 1) When there is no hole to run through or the defense blows through the offensive line I DEFINITELY want Lynch. It's not even close. I'm not 100% certain but it seems that we get more 8 in the box with Lynch. I have heard several people say that Lynch doesn't hit the holes hard. On MANY of the plays I have seen in the past THERE WAS NO HOLE TO HIT. Perhaps the real issue is that opposing defenses don't stack the line of scrimmage against Jackson like they do with Lynch. The real issue could be that Jackson actually has more holes to run through. 2) If there is proper blocking and a hole opened up Jackson might have a SLIGHT edge on Lynch. Jackson's speed makes him more of a home run threat. If the play develops such that a RB with speed can take it to the house, Jackson is likely that guy. If it's not a potential home run play, Lynch will ALWAYS get you those 1 - 5 extra yards at the end by shear force of will alone. Jackson runs pretty hard but Lynch is...well...a "beast" Lynch is a GREAT RB. It's just that Freddie is really good too. Something that nobody mentions is that Freddie is a actually a 28 yr old more mature man who has been playing professional football for his 6th season now. 3 in the NFL. Lynch is a 23 yr old kid who came out of college early who has yet to play his first game of his 3rd season.

I assumed it was just the liquor talkin'. Bob, players are salaried employees of their respective NFL franchises. Whether the company they work for makes a profit or operates at a deficit their salaries are what they are. As many employers have done in this tough economy you can lay off part of your work force but you don't screw with a man's pay check. Sorry to say Bob, it sounds like a bit of class envy going on. We wish we could play the game they play for 1/10 the money. Truth is we aren't good enough and these fellows were blessed with not only truly uncommon athletic ability but also the work ethic to take advantage of it. Don't be a hater. The sad part of it is that all this talk of contracts reminds us that this is a business and not the game we played for free as children for the sheer fun of it. Despite the hype of the glamorous lifestyle that you envy or deplore these guys work their asses off and get beat up on a daily basis. They have lasting injuries for the rest of their lives and last I heard also generally have shorter lifespans. These guys deserve their pay checks.

I don't loose sleep over it. What do we want a communist state? Supply and demand is at the very heart of and is the basis for our capitalist free market society. Other teams have to work under the exact same salary cap that we do.

Is paying fair market value for a great player over paying?

QUOTE (PDaDdy @ Sep 12 2009, 04:07 PM) * It's crazy to say but knowing our penchant for playing veterans over rookies I don't think Maybin would have started week 1 even if he made all of training camp. I could be wrong but even at draft time they were talking about just bringing in Maybin on obvious pass down situations. I know I'm not the coach but I say make this guy the starter Week 1 on every down. Let this kid loose! Tell him his only job is to go after the QB EVERY play! If he meets the RB on the way so be it. LOL. I've said it before, just cover him up with a line backer and/or a safety and let him do his thing. Heh Heh...Yes...We don't have any veterans to play over the rookies!!! They showed them all the door Desperate times call for desperate measures.

First of all I haven't seen him being bad against the run. Everyone is regurgitating what scouts and pundits said during the draft. He indeed could be a liability somewhat for all I know. This is why I suggested covering him up with a linebacker and/or safety. Hey, at least we would know where they were running That in itself is a benefit! LOL.

That's what everyone says that they are better against the run. Personally I don't think they are anything special. How bad does the coaching staff think that Maybin is against the run? He didn't look bad to me in limited action in the preseason. It's really more of an issue of whether he starts or not to me. I haven't heard about rookie DEs wearing down any more than any other rookie. Even if he does start we do rotate our d-linemen so this would hopefully minimize any potential "wearing down" at the end of the year.

IT'S A BUSINESS FIRST! NEVER, NEVER FORGET THAT!!!!!

You bring up a good point in that he will get in the game whether he starts or not. I think it goes without saying that if he starts he will get even MORE snaps is my point. Of course this is based on my opinion that Maybin is better than Kelsay and Denney. In limited action I haven't yet seen him be a liability in the run game. I would like to see us use the philosophy that they use with QBs drafted in the top half of the first round. Throw them in the fire and let them learn on the fly!!! They'll play a promising, talented rookie QB over a known commodity veteran that may actually be a more complete QB at the time and gives your team a better chance to win in the short term. The kid has the potential to be 10 times the play maker that the known commodities we currently have manning the right side on the defense are.

Regarding New England I 100% agree. They pass more often than anyone and they have the balls to do it on 1st down! Word out of the coaching staff and front office was that Maybin would come in on obvious passing downs and be a situation pass rusher. Not my words. I assume what they mean by that is 3rd and long perhaps some 2nd and longer situations.

It's crazy to say but knowing our penchant for playing veterans over rookies I don't think Maybin would have started week 1 even if he made all of training camp. I could be wrong but even at draft time they were talking about just bringing in Maybin on obvious pass down situations. I know I'm not the coach but I say make this guy the starter Week 1 on every down. Let this kid loose! Tell him his only job is to go after the QB EVERY play! If he meets the RB on the way so be it. LOL. I've said it before, just cover him up with a line backer and/or a safety and let him do his thing.

Hey just throwing this out there. What do we think the chances are that we resign Langston Walker after the first game? To my knowledge nobody has jumped on him yet or rung up his phone. Langston is not a LT but I was fine with him at RT. We could probably get him for a lot less money with no guaranteed year long contract if we resign him after Monday night.

To be clear they said they would TALK if he reported. There was NO promise of a new contract, NOR the promise of a fair market value contract. The front office for whatever reasons, which perhaps they will only know 100%, let a young pro bowl LT tackle leave town.

I actually do like Jaws but he also said that both JP and Trent were starting to get it at times in there career and were going to be real NFL QBs. We saw how the one turned out and the other is in the process of regressing and crashing and burning! I certainly get the points he's trying to make but let's hope he is wrong about the no huddle. Perhaps they can make a positive by running it at more of a hurry up pace keeping the defense off guard and hopefully a little vanilla.

LOL...TOO TRUE!!!!

Difference of opinion I guess. I don't see Walker as a LT at any weight. He was moved there out of desperation not on field performance.

I'm sure you saw what you saw but I would draw a different conclusion. I think you seeing him play differently is a reflection of his lack of ability to play LT. I also don't recall Langston saying he wasn't motivated to play LT I assume you are equating his lack of optimism with lack of trying. He was obviously not optimistic but I wouldn't be optimistic going into the ring with Mike Tyson. I just know I'm not the right guy for that job! I'm sorry but it is just a complete fantasy that a significant contributing factor to his failure was lack of enthusiasm. The lack of enthusiasm was a symptom not the problem. HUGE difference.

You're kidding right? The guy is listed at a "kind" 366 lbs for his now 8 year career. He probably hasn't weighed 315-320 since high school! What makes you think he could drop nearly 50lbs from the draft in April when he heard about the position switch to Training camp in August? Even if he had bypass surgery how would you expect him to be effective shedding that much weight that quickly. You lose muscle as well when you try to do that.

Where do you get this "lack of motivation" BS from? I haven't read a word of that anywhere!!! AGAIN this is the problem. People hated Peters so much and thought so little of the LT position that they though you could take any 300+ lb guy and shove him in there to protect Trent's blind side. If they don't succeed...IT'S BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T TRY HARD ENOUGH!!! The Raiders, the Raiders for crying out loud, tried him at LT and he failed miserably. Why did we think he was going to succeed a few years later for us? Get a clue!!!

This is half of the problem. Walker was pretty decent at RT. IT'S NOT HIS FAULT THE BILLS BRAIN TRUST TRIED TO MAKE HIM A LT!!!!! Walker isn't, never was and never will be a LT!!!! He doesn't have the athleticism OR body type to do it!!!! It would be like trying to play Freddie Jackson at FB and complaining that he is undersized and not strong at the point of attack. He's NOT A FULL BACK....NEVER WILL BE!!

Definitely some good points in there. QB has been a problem for us since Kelly. A fact that everyone here laments. It's not the only way to make the play offs or win a super bowl but it sure freakin' helps and we haven't had that guy since. Of course we can't be stocked with pro bowl talent at every position. It's just one facet, but we need to be willing to pay at least SOME of the good to pro bowl talent we draft or develop. We hang on to and over pay for chumps for lineman and let GOOD to GREAT CBs run through us like a turnstile. We should be drafting impact players at any position that gives us value when its our pick instead of continually restocking the shelves with CB because we won't pay the last guy fair market value.

He was serviceable if not stellar at RT. At LT people were fooling themselves!

Very true. It is the small cross section of two much larger groups. The group that thought Peters sucked as a football player and the group that thought Walker was an adequate replacement.

Right on!! He is better suited for that job than LT that is for damn sure. At RT he was a journeyman who I actually didn't have a problem with. Could have had better, could have had worse.

WOW...LOL...Nailed it on the head right there buddy!!! It's funny how people talk themselves into justifying what their heart feels in ignorance of reality. If I had the time I would love to create a list of the "Screw Peters" people who said Langston was better and would be a fine replacement. Nothing better than shoving it in people's faces when they argue so vehemently that they are being logical when it is SO obvious they are just being emotional and pissed about a guys business acumen. These guys talked themselves into believing not only that he wasn't a pro bowler but he was actually a substandard LT! FOOLS! These are also the people that claimed that Langston wasn't putting forth the proper effort and that's why he wasn't a adequate replacement for Peters. CLOWNS!!!! You don't take a slow, lumbering, road grating, 6'8" 360, career RT and try to replace a pro bowl LT AND THEN have the nerve to blame him for not putting in enough effort to overcome the fact that he was SO obviously physically and athletically unfit for the job. Cold does of reality for ya!!!!! SUCKERS!!!!!!!!!