Trade Lynch?....No trade Fred Jackson!

[Frez]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo trade Fred Jackson for a draft pick or another player that could help us now. Jackson has more trade value than Lynch and we are loaded at RB with this Bell kid also waiting in the wings.

 

Just a thought

[bowery4]

No lets not trade any of them, just sayin

[tbonestake]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo trade Fred Jackson for a draft pick or another player that could help us now. Jackson has more trade value than Lynch and we are loaded at RB with this Bell kid also waiting in the wings.

 

Just a thought

 

 

[nucci]

Very few RB get traded. It is easier and cheaper to just draft one. I doubt either would bring much in return.

[Búfalo Blanco]

No lets not trade any of them, just sayin

 

This...

 

We need all the weapons we can get...

[ChasBB]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo trade Fred Jackson for a draft pick or another player that could help us now. Jackson has more trade value than Lynch and we are loaded at RB with this Bell kid also waiting in the wings.

 

Just a thought

Jackson had 4th highest total yards from scrimmage in NFL history last year -- on an otherwise pitiful offense -- and you want to trade that kind of production away? The more weapons this team has, the better. Gailey has got to feel like a kid in a candy store when he is drawing up plays with the talent in the backfield.

[geggytah]

Jackson had 4th highest total yards from scrimmage in NFL history last year -- on an otherwise pitiful offense -- and you want to trade that kind of production away? The more weapons this team has, the better. Gailey has got to feel like a kid in a candy store when he is drawing up plays with the talent in the backfield.

 

That is the WORST stat of all time and is very deceiving...remember that over 1,000 of those yards were on kickoff returns. Being a 1,000 yard kickoff return man can be done in your sleep - especially when opposing teams score a lot of points and you have 7 opportunities a game to get 20-25 yards a pop before you even see a defender. I am in agreement that Lynch should be on this team and that IF any gets traded out of the backfield, FJ should be the first to go of the three - Freddie is reliable and can get the job done for sure, but Lynch can and has too and has more big play capability.

[OCinBuffalo]

This...

 

We need all the weapons we can get...

Especially when we lost 2 running backs in one game already this year. Hopefully the FO learned the lesson.

 

While I am very much looking forward to seeing Spiller get carries, I want Lynch in the game for 3rd and 2. I want to see Fred Jackson start the game and take the initial tough carries, and especially be in the game on 3rd and long because I don't trust Spiller to pick up the blitz...yet.

 

My prediction: I bet there are a whole lot of plays, including wildcat sets and motions that set them up as WRs, with all 3 running backs in the game(Fred can throw, and so can Lynch), that we haven't seen yet. No point in putting them on tape in preseason. Never mind the fact that McIntyre has shown he can make a play when needed. Anybody remember the '88 Bengals 3 RB backfield? That was deadly...provided all 3 of them showed up and didn't miss the SB due to cocaine....

[Chandler#81]

I think -to the OP's point, we're going to be parting with at least 1 RB as I can't see keeping 6 on the 53. Simpson -from Indy- has NFL polish and will make a roster somewhere. Bell & McIntyre aren't going anywhere. Then we have 3 bona fide starters on a team that will go with 3 &4 wides as situations dictate. That's a whole lot of UN-use.

 

As Frez sez, better to get something than nothing. Fast Freddie's '09 campaign puts a lot of luster on an aging RB who still has gas in the tank.

 

Why not?

[OCinBuffalo]

I think -to the OP's point, we're going to be parting with at least 1 RB as I can't see keeping 6 on the 53. Simpson -from Indy- has NFL polish and will make a roster somewhere. Bell & McIntyre aren't going anywhere. Then we have 3 bona fide starters on a team that will go with 3 &4 wides as situations dictate. That's a whole lot of UN-use.

 

As Frez sez, better to get something than nothing. Fast Freddie's '09 campaign puts a lot of luster on an aging RB who still has gas in the tank.

 

Why not?

Dick Jauron loved CBs, and now we have the, if not one of, the best secondaries in the league...supposedly.

 

Chan Gailey loves offensive play makers. It seems reasonable to assume, especially given his gadget plays, that he will want to retain as many play makers as he can. That's why not.

 

Consider: our much maligned offensive line has helped produce 1000 yards of total offense and 11( -2 Pick 6s...so 9) touchdowns...against teams that have supposedly good defenses...in three games. The offensive line is starting to look less and less important...and the playmakers more and more important...as time goes on.

Edited August 31, 2010 by OCinBuffalo

[Dan]

I think -to the OP's point, we're going to be parting with at least 1 RB as I can't see keeping 6 on the 53. Simpson -from Indy- has NFL polish and will make a roster somewhere. Bell & McIntyre aren't going anywhere. Then we have 3 bona fide starters on a team that will go with 3 &4 wides as situations dictate. That's a whole lot of UN-use.

 

As Frez sez, better to get something than nothing. Fast Freddie's '09 campaign puts a lot of luster on an aging RB who still has gas in the tank.

 

Why not?

Excellent point... Bell and McIntyre are definite keepers. Lynch or Jackson needs to go.

[K Gun Special]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo trade Fred Jackson for a draft pick or another player that could help us now. Jackson has more trade value than Lynch and we are loaded at RB with this Bell kid also waiting in the wings.

 

Just a thought

 

How do we replace all of Freddy's TDs???

[PromoTheRobot]

We need to trade away all our good players so we can draft our QB of the future. Were in danger of making the playoffs and messing up the plan.

 

PTR

[PDaDdy]

This won't be a popular opinion with the fan boys. Jackson is a great running back but Lynch makes a better thunder to Spiller's lightning. Lynch is even better at getting the tougher yards and Lynch is MUCH younger. Lynch is more truly a change of pace from Spiller. It's still really early but Spiller just looks like a younger, more elusive and much more speedy Jackson. Right now and potentially for the future as well keeping all 3 makes a LOT of sense. That doesn't even take into consideration the injuries.

 

If one does have to go next year or the year after that, it's probably Jackson.

[cmjoyce113]

Why would be we trade anyone? Think about how effective Spiller will be when defenses are tired in the third and fourth quarter. Spiller has only had 3 or 4 carries going into the second half. Lynch and Jackson have had 30 carries or so. I just don't see how a tired defense will stop and of our fresh running backs. Especially if that fresh running back is the fastest of the 3.

[JPS]

Both of those guys are Wally Pipp. Keep one as a power back, send the other one to Seattle for a conditional 3rd. I'd rather keep Lynch as a talent, but Jackson as a person with less risk of implosion.

[wnyBacker]

makes no sense watsoever

[Albany,n.y.]

Based on age & draft status (1st rd vs undrafted FA) Lynch has more trade value than Jackson. Plus, of the two, Lynch is the guy who wants out of here. Trade Lynch when a contender loses its #1 RB after a few weeks & have Jackson, Simpson & Bell backing up Spiller.

[bowery4]

yeah because trading your best players is the best way to build through the draft I want to hear this argument again in week 11 or 12 and you guys do know this is MLs contract year right? That maybe reason #1 they shopped him a little earlier.

[Peace]

This won't be a popular opinion with the fan boys. Jackson is a great running back but Lynch makes a better thunder to Spiller's lightning. Lynch is even better at getting the tougher yards and Lynch is MUCH younger. Lynch is more truly a change of pace from Spiller. It's still really early but Spiller just looks like a younger, more elusive and much more speedy Jackson. Right now and potentially for the future as well keeping all 3 makes a LOT of sense. That doesn't even take into consideration the injuries.

 

If one does have to go next year or the year after that, it's probably Jackson.

 

Lynch, despite his size and obvious strength, has done nothing to prove he can get the 1 on 3rd and 1. I would rather have Jackson take that carry. Jackson finds space and hits holes. Lynch runs into people's backs.

 

As far as trading one vs the other, I don't care. RBs of their caliber are a dime a dozen.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Peace

[PDaDdy]

Why would be we trade anyone? Think about how effective Spiller will be when defenses are tired in the third and fourth quarter. Spiller has only had 3 or 4 carries going into the second half. Lynch and Jackson have had 30 carries or so. I just don't see how a tired defense will stop and of our fresh running backs. Especially if that fresh running back is the fastest of the 3.

 

Good thought but in my opinion you have it backwards. Let Spiller blow the game open and be the home run threat that makes the defense play the offense differently. Let Jackson be the semi change of pace back who is better at blitz pick up's and probably getting tougher yards than Spiller. When it comes fourth quarter time and the defense is warn down you bring in Lynch the shifty battering ram to grind it out and kill the clock for the win.

 

How do we replace all of Freddy's TDs???

 

LOL

 

Based on age & draft status (1st rd vs undrafted FA) Lynch has more trade value than Jackson. Plus, of the two, Lynch is the guy who wants out of here. Trade Lynch when a contender loses its #1 RB after a few weeks & have Jackson, Simpson & Bell backing up Spiller.

 

That makes more sense from a trade value perspective but I don't think it would leave us with the best team. Jackson is turning 30 this year or may have turned 30 already actually. Don't feel like looking it up.

[bowery4]

[quote name='Peace' timestamp='1283260399' post='1950179'

 

As far as trading one vs the other, I don't care. RBs of their caliber are a dime a dozen.

 

I totally disagree, this team blew last year and the 2 before for that matter and yet both managed to get 1000+

Two of our backs are #1 picks and the other one we got lucky and developed after playing in the bush leagues.

Yeah they are better run blockers up front but the backs were/are good. Our Oline has and is been very bad and these two light up. Plus our new play maker makes defending just the RBs a chore, first the first time in a few years there will be more to game plan for than the running game.

It will work, getting rid of any one of these three right now would be stupid. Saving a Bell or Simpson on the PS to develop for next year is a good idea because ML will be gone.

Edited August 31, 2010 by bowery4

[PDaDdy]

Lynch, despite his size and obvious strength, has done nothing to prove he can get the 1 on 3rd and 1. I would rather have Jackson take that carry. Jackson finds space and hits holes. Lynch runs into people's backs.

 

As far as trading one vs the other, I don't care. RBs of their caliber are a dime a dozen.

 

LOL. Man I wish I could put you in the room with this clown I was arguing with in a post I started. He was another of these "I love Jackson, I hate Lynch" guys. He swore up and down that the Bills would replace jackson in the short yardage goal line situations. He used this to try to discredit or color the fact that Lynch got the same number of TDs as Freddie with half the touches. It would be great to see you guys duke it out.

 

Is Lynch better in short yardage situations like the goal line, 3rd and 1, etc and gets those short yardage situations? OR, is Jackson left in the game in those situations because he is better at getting tough short yards but somehow magically can't get into the end zone to save his life? One of these must be true.

[Peace]

I totally disagree, this team blew last year and the 2 before for that matter and yet both managed to get 1000+

Two of our backs are #1 picks and the other one we got lucky and developed after playing in the bush leagues.

Yeah they are better run blockers up front but the backs were/are good. Our Oline has and is been very bad and these two light up. Plus our new play maker makes defending just the RBs a chore, first the first time in a few years there will be more to game plan for than the running game.

It will work, getting rid of any one of these three right now would be stupid. Saving a Bell or Simpson on the PS to develop for next year is a good idea because ML will be gone.

 

Half the RBs in the NFL rush for 1000 yards, ie, 70 yards/game. That's not much of an accomplishment.

 

No Buffalo Bills player from 2007-2009 (or 2000-2009 for that matter) :lit it up." Take that back.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Peace

[thewildrabbit]

can we trade you instead...

 

 

In today's NFL most every team is running a two back offense to ease the burden of so many carries in a season, as it burns them out quickly

 

Marshawn is the Mack truck, Jackson is the Jaguar, Spiller is the Ferrari

 

If the Bills want to be a dominate running team this season they will keep all those three, and might even keep Bell as well

[Rob's House]

LOL. Man I wish I could put you in the room with this clown I was arguing with in a post I started. He was another of these "I love Jackson, I hate Lynch" guys. He swore up and down that the Bills would replace jackson in the short yardage goal line situations. He used this to try to discredit or color the fact that Lynch got the same number of TDs as Freddie with half the touches. It would be great to see you guys duke it out.

 

Is Lynch better in short yardage situations like the goal line, 3rd and 1, etc and gets those short yardage situations? OR, is Jackson left in the game in those situations because he is better at getting tough short yards but somehow magically can't get into the end zone to save his life? One of these must be true.

You keep beating this drum. Lynch scored 2 TDs last year. He didn't exactly light the world on fire. If you want to argue that in previous years he did and therefore can again that's fine. But to use this to denigrate Jackson just doesn't work. You can't get an accurate player comparison by comparing last years stats to previous years because the whole system was different. How about we see what Jackson does with his red zone opportunities this year before we decide he can't score.

[bowery4]

Half the RBs in the NFL rush for 1000 yards, ie, 70 yards/game. That's not much of an accomplishment.

 

No Buffalo Bills player from 2007-2009 (or 2000-2009 for that matter) :lit it up." Take that back.

 

No you are wrong 1/2 the backs are not 1000+ runners; back that up if you are going to post that crap, Lynch and Fred have both been rated top 20 rushers (Lynch 2007 11th, ML 2008 17th, FJ last year 17th) this doesn't include either of their pass catching.

There are 32 teams each has at least 2 RBs that is 64 plus there are in reality more than that. so you are just brown eyed in this case.

[bills in va]

Especially when we lost 2 running backs in one game already this year. Hopefully the FO learned the lesson.

 

While I am very much looking forward to seeing Spiller get carries, I want Lynch in the game for 3rd and 2. I want to see Fred Jackson start the game and take the initial tough carries, and especially be in the game on 3rd and long because I don't trust Spiller to pick up the blitz...yet.

 

My prediction: I bet there are a whole lot of plays, including wildcat sets and motions that set them up as WRs, with all 3 running backs in the game(Fred can throw, and so can Lynch), that we haven't seen yet. No point in putting them on tape in preseason. Never mind the fact that McIntyre has shown he can make a play when needed. Anybody remember the '88 Bengals 3 RB backfield? That was deadly...provided all 3 of them showed up and didn't miss the SB due to cocaine....

If you re saying Lynch is our best short yardage back, your mistaken. The stats don't support that. Jackson was as good or better in short yardage situations last year and neither ere very good. Brian on Rumblings provided some surprizing stats lat season on this topic. I would take Spiller over both of them in a 3rd and 2 play. He is faster, more elusive and has a better chance of picking up 2 yards, especially on the goal line where he already showed he can take a inside handoff and beat all defnders to the pylon. If you think because Lynch is bigger he's better that logic is faulty. Beastmode has shown tobe leastmode in short yardage during his career.

[Grimace]

Why would be we trade anyone? Think about how effective Spiller will be when defenses are tired in the third and fourth quarter. Spiller has only had 3 or 4 carries going into the second half. Lynch and Jackson have had 30 carries or so. I just don't see how a tired defense will stop and of our fresh running backs. Especially if that fresh running back is the fastest of the 3.

 

Do you mean to say that Lynch and Jackson will get 30 carries in the first half, or the game? I presume the game, but it reads like the first half.

[flopagamo]

yeah because trading your best players is the best way to build through the draft I want to hear this argument again in week 11 or 12 and you guys do know this is MLs contract year right? That maybe reason #1 they shopped him a little earlier.

 

RB being a notoriously injury-plagued position league-wide, year after year... Lynch being in his contract year... trading any of these 3 guys has to be the last thing on their minds. Besides, I doubt the FO is completely sold on Joique Bell's long term viability as an NFL back. Seems like every year they have a young RB that looks great (particularly in the 2nd half of the preseason games) and ends up cut or on the practice squad. Shaud Williams comes to mind (although I think he made the roster one year)... who were the Joique Bells of years past?

[EastRochBillsfan]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo trade Fred Jackson for a draft pick or another player that could help us now. Jackson has more trade value than Lynch and we are loaded at RB with this Bell kid also waiting in the wings.

 

Just a thought

 

I honestly can't believe we are having this discussion, especially with 2 of our top 3 rb's injured. This is now a strength of our team and should help us win a good deal of games. I just don't see the sense in weakening a strength. And besides, Lynch is always one blunt away from a long suspension so I am not sure that he is the running back I would keep.

 

That is the WORST stat of all time and is very deceiving...remember that over 1,000 of those yards were on kickoff returns. Being a 1,000 yard kickoff return man can be done in your sleep - especially when opposing teams score a lot of points and you have 7 opportunities a game to get 20-25 yards a pop before you even see a defender. I am in agreement that Lynch should be on this team and that IF any gets traded out of the backfield, FJ should be the first to go of the three - Freddie is reliable and can get the job done for sure, but Lynch can and has too and has more big play capability.

 

I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. Freddie is shiftier and a better pass catcher which I think makes him a better big play guy, lynch is more of a mauler. Either way, I want them BOTH on my team.

 

I think -to the OP's point, we're going to be parting with at least 1 RB as I can't see keeping 6 on the 53. Simpson -from Indy- has NFL polish and will make a roster somewhere. Bell & McIntyre aren't going anywhere. Then we have 3 bona fide starters on a team that will go with 3 &4 wides as situations dictate. That's a whole lot of UN-use.

 

As Frez sez, better to get something than nothing. Fast Freddie's '09 campaign puts a lot of luster on an aging RB who still has gas in the tank.

 

Why not?

injuries, more weapons, different styles, not gonna get a premier pick anyways-is it worth a 4th or worse?-I don't think so. but that's just me.

 

How do we replace all of Freddy's TDs???

I really hate when you guys bring this up. Hypothetically speaking, what if freddie was to get the same carries that Marshwn got when he scored a td. maybe we were in a better position to score, maybe the play call was better, maybe a blitz was picked up. There are so many factors that come into play on a touchdown. The fact is, freddie moves the chains. With out him doing that, it's quite possible lynch doesn't get his shot at the endzone. This is a TEAM game, why we gotta dog our own players is beyond me.

[C.Biscuit97]

Crazy thought: considering how rbs get hurt as we saw this preseason, why not keep them all? We have the best trio of rbs in the NFL? Why hurt that? We ran a full house backfield earlier in the preseason. There's no reason all 3 guys can't get their share of carries.

 

Additionally, it might increase one of their trade value in the off season.

[CashHoarder]

Well he is coming up to the age where the wheels start falling off, so if Buffalo can get something that'll help fill more needs, then I say do it; especially if Jackson proves to have another solid season this year.

[Cornerville]

Well he is coming up to the age where the wheels start falling off, so if Buffalo can get something that'll help fill more needs, then I say do it; especially if Jackson proves to have another solid season this year.

 

 

Love the name and the avatar

[CashHoarder]

Love the name and the avatar

 

Thank you! Ralph is my financial inspiration!

[Cornerville]

Thank you! Ralph is my financial inspiration!

 

 

How so? Signing Chris Kelsay's to obscene contracts?

[Peace]

No you are wrong 1/2 the backs are not 1000+ runners; back that up if you are going to post that crap, Lynch and Fred have both been rated top 20 rushers (Lynch 2007 11th, ML 2008 17th, FJ last year 17th) this doesn't include either of their pass catching.

There are 32 teams each has at least 2 RBs that is 64 plus there are in reality more than that. so you are just brown eyed in this case.

 

You miss the point and do so in an obnoxious way you would never do in person. Setting your incivility aside, half of teams have a 1000 rusher. Happier now? It's not impressive to have a 1000 yard rusher.

 

15 teams had 1000 yard rushers in 2009. (Jackson was 15th with 106_.)

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&statisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-n=1

 

16 teams had 1000 rushers in 2008. Lynch was 13th with 1036.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2008&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

 

17 in 2007. Lynch was 11th with 1115 yards.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2007&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=1

 

15 + 16 + 17 / 3*32 = HALF of teams have an RB that rushed for 1000 yards. For most of those teams, Bills included, substitute another guy and you still get 1000 yards.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Peace

[CashHoarder]

How so? Signing Chris Kelsay's to obscene contracts?

 

Got to spend some money on some unusual luxuries! Forget guys like Fletcher, Winfield, and McGahee...it's all about Kelsay baby!

[C.Biscuit97]

Well he is coming up to the age where the wheels start falling off, so if Buffalo can get something that'll help fill more needs, then I say do it; especially if Jackson proves to have another solid season this year.

 

 

Jackson doesn't have close to the wear and tear other rbs his age have.

[CashHoarder]

Jackson doesn't have close to the wear and tear other rbs his age have.

 

True that which is why he still possesses some value. He certainly has more trade value than Marshawn and you and I know already that there's multiple holes that need filling and if Jackson can net a nice return in assets, then you got to pull the trigger on it.