PDaDdy

Apparently he is not a LT either. LOL....I had to take the shot. When our line can open up a hole in the run game I'll say we have the right guys in the right spot.

Same thing I said for Poz. It all depends on the salary. Donte is a good safety. He is not #9 overall good but he is a solid player. If people could forget where he was drafted and just focus on him being a lunch pail type player he would be just another one of the guys. As usual with Bufrfalo fans we will try to run a solid player out of town just because he wasn't an all star safety because he was drafted at the #9 spot. It's not his fault our developmentally disabled front office picked Donte at #9.

Right on man. That is basically what I was trying to say. They had complementary skills and I would have loved to have them both and have drafted a solid O-lineman. I hate these predraft discussions but if there wasn't a lineman we "loved" at #9 (Spiller) we could have traded down for the one we "liked" and gotten more picks. Trading down almost never happens and it never happens with the Bills but imagine if. SOME people just want to make this Lynch vs Jackson or just use the opportunity to denigrate his skills on the field because of his issues off of it. Not sure what that is about. Was there a point you were trying to make or were you just trying to offend every black person in existence?

Apparently they didn't teach reading comprehension at your school either. As I already stated that run does not a career make but it was a representative microcosmic example of what the kid is and can be. On display were his power, his speed and his shiftiness. Much to your consternation also on display was what is hopefully the improving vision of a 4th year RB. By the way Jackson and Lynch didn't get to start behind the same line. In 2008 when Lynch was the starter he was behind the crappier line. In 2009 Jackson started behind the revamped offensive line with our 1st and 2nd round pick O-linemen who fans are in love with. So NO. Not the same line. That being said in 2010 Lynch did make some token starts behind the new line while he was trying to get out of town and the front office was trying to get rid of him as the city was already poisoned against him. Also note that while Trent Deadwards was the starter nobody was really that effective running the ball because defenses in no way feared the pass. In 2010 Lynch left and Fitz started around the same time and Freddy got the starting job back and racked up an amazing 0.5 TDs/gm. This with a credible passing game and a QB that could call out protections and move the ball in the air. We needed the one two punch of both of them because Lynch could get in the endzone and make tougher yards while freddy did everything else. I still stand by my comments that statistically you can't just decide to take out an amazing run to try to make the factual stats fit your argument. He and Freddy were a good duo and we messed that up partially because of people that couldn't see past a few screw ups. A large contingent of the fan base turned on him like a pack of dogs as did the media. Which ever side you stand on the issue you know the mistakes are his own. He alone is responsible for them. That is not in question. Whether you try to support and forgive or spit venom is the individual's choice. We obviously know which choice you made.

Will read the article in a bit but basing my comments purely off of the 12 overall ranking I just don't buy all of it. Fitz was very obviously better than Trent Edwards at getting the line in the right position for pass protection. What I don't understand is if the line is so good how come Freddie Jackson could only find his way into the end zone 5 times all year. Fred Jackson is a pretty darn good RB but has not shown a great nose for the end zone in his time here. I am now hearing that the line is in the top 12 in the league and I have heard that Freddy is a great running back. One of these things can't be true. Either the line isn't that good or Freddie isn't that good or we would have have more rushing TDs for our starting RB. Never mind. The article was for pass protection only. Please disregard the rushing comments as they are obviously not factored in to the 12th overall ranking. You should probably change the title to say "O-line ranks 12th in pass protection".

Depends on what Poz wants for compensation and if they think there is actually a shot that he could play 16 games.

Good points in there man. Measured and mature post.

I wonder why he would do that with such support from the fan base through a tough time and learning experience in a young mans life who came from a situation less than an ideal 2 parent suburban home?

See comments above about coming in during the middle of the season to a new city, program offense, etc. As explained earlier if you paid attention Jackson does have better vision and cut back running. I would hope a 9 year veteran would. No dispute there. Lynch and Jackson are different styles of RBs. Lynch is more of a pounder who is shifty and Jackson is a shifty guy who can pound. This isn't an indictment of Jackson as you would like to make it a Jackson vs Lynch thing. You guys are ridiculous with the polar opposite crap. "My guy is the best in the league and is so incredibly underrated and your guy is absolutely horrible and overrated." They are both good. Grow up! Back on point! They were a good one two punch together and the fan hatred of him helped drive him out of town, caused us to use the #9 pick on a RB and set us back. I have VERY high hopes for Spiller but he hasn't done a damn thing yet and Freddy being north of 30 doesn't give me a good feeling going forward. We should have held on to Lynch, used resources on the OL and we would have been looking pretty good. By the way what low budget school did you go to where you get such a small sample size of carries in the play offs and you just decide to take out the longest run by the player? Why do you bother to post? Take away the immaculate reception and the steelers played a crappy game!!!

Your right the Seahawks line isn't much better which makes it even more impressive. I think the guy did pretty well for coming into a city, offense and personnel grouping in week 5. Imagine what the guy might be able to do with a full off season in the program as the starter. Oh...wait...full off season...

It was also representative of his style of running and tenacity all in one nice little microcosmic package. Haters are going to hate so we won't change any minds but I agree with you 100%. I guess it shouldn't amaze me that people let there personal feelings impact what they can see with their eyes and irrefutable statistics. To be sure Lynch in his 4th year still had a lot to learn from a classy and solid 9 year veteran like Jackson. Lynch could have been a Bill for many years and obviously has a lot more career and potential improvement ahead of him.

Never really considered whether it was the best thing for him or not. I suppose the best thing for him would have been for fans to cut the kid some slack and let him mature and grow. Since certain vocal members of the fan base were poisoned against him it probably was the best thing for him but not a good thing for the Bills. I think that is a function of playing in Buffalo. We are incredibly opinionated about certain players especially if they don't fit the western NY working class humble hero type image. In other cities I don't think it would have been NEARLY as big an issue. Just sucks because we were absolutely fine with Lynch and Jackson but in addition to his own actions fans helped run him out of town. True true. Exactly my point. Of course someone had to make it a fight. If Jackson is so much better how come he doesn't score TDs? TDs put points on the board and win games. Period. End of story. I think Jackson is a pretty damn good RB but apparently he needs a seeing eye dog to get into the end zone. Absolutely part of my point. Instead of dumping Lynch and using 2009 #9 overall on Spiller we should have kept him and gotten an OL guy. I have always said that with a competent NFL line Lynch was the man. With the crap we have and the promising young players who are developing who can't open many holes yet Jackson's cut back running and vision are greater attributes. Now if only that vision saw him into the end zone about twice as often we would be looking good.

It probably seems like I am picking a fight. I'm moving on but I'm still a little bumbed about this. He was not a perfect human being off the field but on the field he is one of only a handful of guys in the NFL that run with that much want too. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-films-anatomy-of-a-play/09000d5d81da2200/Wild-card-Anatomy-Lynch-s-TD-run?module=HP_cp2 I just recently got into a heated discussion about Lynch vs Jackson. I really do like them both and thought they were great compliments to each other. Jackson started to run harder like Lynch and Lynch was hopefully learning how to be a more complete RB and better person off the field from Freddy. Too bad many Buffalo fans are an unforgiving lot and IMO really and truly did help to run him out of town. No one want's to stay where there is so much open dislike for them. Talk about blowing things out of proportion. Maybe if we kept our mouths shut and let the KID do a little maturing we wouldn't have had to spend our first round pick on CJ Spiller to replace Lynch. That being said I really hope Spiller gets it this year. We don't need another first round bust and we certainly don't need a first round bust that was chosen because the fan base helped to run a perfectly good RB out of town.

You do realize we played a LOT of 4-3 the second half of the season in part due to Kyle's talent as a 4-3 DT not a 3-4 NT? Don't get me wrong. Kyle Williams is the man and proved me wrong every year he has been with the team but he is somewhat out of position as a 3-4 NT in part due to his size and that he is a penetrator not a 2 gap plugger.

Unlike your hate of Lynch I don't hate Jackson. I am glad he is on our team. He is a great all around RB but he is not exceptional at anything in particular and unfortunately despite his superstar status in your mind he doesn't score many TDs. TDs put points on the board. Points win games. I know you get that but despite that fact you treat Fred Jackson like an elite RB. Lynch with a worse line was better at scoring TDs. That statistical fact will not change despite how exponentially better you think Jackson is than Lynch.

Eh, no worries. We're cool. I do see the good in both guys. All the stats from both guys helped the team. We just place different importance on various things. I think that they had complementary skills in a way. I always hoped for a great offensive line which I thought Lynch was more effective behind as the starter. When he got a hole and hit it he was like a thing unleashed. He is was also younger by a number of years. Truly Lynch could have learned a lot from Jackson though on and off the field. In a way I think Lynch's running style rubbed off on Jackson trying for that extra yard. Jackson seemed to gain some tenacity as he has played for Buffalo.

Like I said " I love you holier than thou "just look with your eyes" guys as if your "vision" is objective and true and anyone who disagrees with you is blind/wrong and stat's be damned! "

For someone to be a "hater" don't they have to hate? I think Jackson is a great #2 RB, a great person and a great feel good story. The fact that I think he lacks something as a number #1 is an objective opinion (oh the irony) and does not a "hater" make. I only responded to stats with stats. Your stats. What some stats people like yourself do is misuse them to back up a point and ignore other important stats. Things like comparing starter stats to starter stats for Lynch and Jackson. When you do so things start to look a lot more level. Well, except for Lynch's higher TD production. If Jackson had so much better vision than Lynch, as you say, how come he couldn't "see" his way into the end zone more than TWO times as a starter in 2009 and an awesome FIVE in 2010. I love you holier than thou "just look with your eyes" guys as if your "vision" is objective and true and anyone who disagrees with you is blind/wrong and stat's be damned! Great for a laugh. Thanks for starting off my weekend right! PS. I couldn't care about your opinion of me. I'm not a child looking for acceptance or approval. Just callin' em like I see em like everyone else here.

Ah the haters never tire do they? How many rushing TDs did Jackson score in 2009 when he was given the starting job over Lynch? That's right...a whopping TWO!!! 237 freakin' carries and a grand total of TWO rushing tds. Jackson is a great feel good story but the people that feel he is elite or better than Lynch need to get off the crack. People hated on Lynch for his issues OFF the field and let that cloud their vision of his performance ON the field. I think Jackson is a great #2 but as a #1 he leaves something to be desired particularly rushing TDs. For the stat lovers you make a convincing argument but you left out the most important stat of all, TDs. Remember? The things that put points on the board.

Dareus was best case scenario and I am drinking the Kool aide but I think Darues' contributions will be reflected in the stats. I see 4+ sacks a piece from Dareus and Williams as well as significant improvement in the run defense. Throw in people returning to health, free agency and rookies we could easily jump from worst run defense in the league to solid middle of the pack with some veteran LB coaching from Wansted. The shortened off season could obviously have an impact on the continued effort to make the transition but we may be able to make some surprising strides.

You assume that players have no other option than to play football. They could do plenty of other things for money that would allow them more time with their families and not require them to torture their bodies with lifting and practice and shorten their life spans with incredibly violent collisions and destroyed joints and ligaments. This lack of the big pay day will also have a trickle down effect to college and grade school levels of football. Don't think that young kids dreaming of the fortune, fame and the big pay day down the road won't be impacted. The current NFL lifestyle is a huge motivator. People like to look at this in a vacuum and have an incredibly short sighted and myopic view of the salary issue. Given the nature of the owners business they are not legally compelled to open the books and offer their employees any sort of salaries based on their business earnings. Employees also are free men and should like any other american be able to choose where, for who, or even IF they want to work in a particular profession. So.....now what?

Normal businesses in some ways are not good analogies. Imagine your scenario if there were less than 2000 people in the entire world that could perform their job duties? You can't just go out and grab any bum off the street and stick him in at a position and expect him to perform. That works with burger flippers, street sweepers, accountants, etc. Guys that run 4.3 or are a muscular nimble 300+ lbs or have rocket launchers for arms don't grow on trees. Another thing that people that take this approach forget is that if the product on the field sucks THE FANS will be the first ones to B word about the lack of talent in the NFL. Like few other professions there are only a handful of people that can perform the duties and they are paid exorbitant salaries compared to other fields. Supply and demand works for talent pools as well as commodities. If you don't care about seeing the biggest, fastest, strongest and smartest football players give up on the NFL and watch your local area arena league football team with guys that you and I might be able to out run or lift and feel good that you aren't supporting whiny exceptionally physically gifted millionaires.

Obviously you're exaggerating but I get the point I think you are trying to make. I don't profess to know all of the legalease in there but I don't think the players are prevented from operating as a group just not as a "union". We could let the american capitalist system take over and let it run it's course. Obviously for 50K a year you will not have quality people around your Peyton Manning making him ineffective. Naturally some level of appropriate compensation will be arrived at as teams are comprised of many players that all have to be dedicated to practice and play at a very high level. Kind of like other businesses in america. Business owners will try to get by on the cheap until it significantly impacts the product on the field then they will realize that they will have to pay better salaries for better employees.

I think by far the most telling part of the story is that it is the owners that want the players to operate as a union. If the NFL really did make it a stipulation of the signing the collective bargaining agreement that the players reform the union it is obviously in the owners benefit for there to be a union. Why would the owners want their workforce to unionize if it was a bad thing for them? Therefore we should logically be able to assume the reverse in that the a union is not good for the players. Add in that the players had to decertify to take the legal course of action that they did and that should be proof enough.

I think the original poster meant positive impact.