Logical Reasoning Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 He was a good and strong back but he seemed real slow and not real sure of how to get through the hole. I am not at all saying he was bad because he simply wasn't but the move gets Spiller more carries and Jackson who I would say is in the top five running backs in the league on the field. I am not going to blame the new regime for taking Spiller opposed to a lineman. Spiller was the best player at number nine. If you see something that can change the team you do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson from Gamehendge Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 He was a good and strong back but he seemed real slow and not real sure of how to get through the hole. I am not at all saying he was bad because he simply wasn't but the move gets Spiller more carries and Jackson who I would say is in the top five running backs in the league on the field. I am not going to blame the new regime for taking Spiller opposed to a lineman. Spiller was the best player at number nine. If you see something that can change the team you do it. HAHAHA...that is one of the funniest things I have ever read! I could think of a dozen RB's in the NFL I would take over Fred Jackson. Shoot...Marshawn Lynch is better than Fred Jackson. (and for those of you who say Jackson is better...don't you think the team would have traded Jackson if they could have gotten ANYTHING for him, let alone a 4th rounder???) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beach Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 top 5? c'mon man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 HAHAHA...that is one of the funniest things I have ever read! I could think of a dozen RB's in the NFL I would take over Fred Jackson. Shoot...Marshawn Lynch is better than Fred Jackson. (and for those of you who say Jackson is better...don't you think the team would have traded Jackson if they could have gotten ANYTHING for him, let alone a 4th rounder???) Explain how Marshawn is better than Fred Jackson based on statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prenzoni Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Explain how Marshawn is better than Fred Jackson based on statistics. How about TDs, 18 rushing and receiving vs 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 Spiller was the best player at number nine. If you see something that can change the team you do it. So what if Ingram is the best player on the board when we pick next year? You take him? He's the best player. If you see something that can change the team you do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooderson Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 HAHAHA...that is one of the funniest things I have ever read! I could think of a dozen RB's in the NFL I would take over Fred Jackson. Shoot...Marshawn Lynch is better than Fred Jackson. (and for those of you who say Jackson is better...don't you think the team would have traded Jackson if they could have gotten ANYTHING for him, let alone a 4th rounder???) Marshawn has been in trouble a few times and if he gets in trouble again he's gonna be suspended for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackemrack Posted October 6, 2010 Share Posted October 6, 2010 How about TDs, 18 rushing and receiving vs 8. and a pro-bowl appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Reasoning Posted October 7, 2010 Author Share Posted October 7, 2010 Explain how Marshawn is better than Fred Jackson based on statistics. You are saying Marshawn is a better running back than Fred Jackson. Also, name five that are betting and this is 'overall' running back. Running, catching, wildcat, blitz pickup. My request sounds more disagreeable than it sounds, I simply want to know where you are coming from. Better than Fred Jackson: Johnson, Peterson, Charles and give me some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 He was a good and strong back but he seemed real slow and not real sure of how to get through the hole. I am not at all saying he was bad because he simply wasn't but the move gets Spiller more carries and Jackson who I would say is in the top five running backs in the league on the field. I am not going to blame the new regime for taking Spiller opposed to a lineman. Spiller was the best player at number nine. If you see something that can change the team you do it. Every team needs its unabashed homers, God love ya!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Fred is a better runner than Lynch, Lynch just looks like a beast b/c he doesn't find the hole so he's constantly running into/through people...Fred sees the field better...Lynch dances in the backfield...Lynch is decent but vastly over rated I'd say Jackson is better...but Jackson is vastly over rated...all of our RBs are over rated.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUFF Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 HAHAHA...that is one of the funniest things I have ever read! I could think of a dozen RB's in the NFL I would take over Fred Jackson. Shoot...Marshawn Lynch is better than Fred Jackson. (and for those of you who say Jackson is better...don't you think the team would have traded Jackson if they could have gotten ANYTHING for him, let alone a 4th rounder???) Jackson IS better than lynch! look at ypc. also the next time lynch screws up he's suspended for the season. I also couldn't stand watching him laugh and giggle on the sidelines when the team was losing every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 (edited) Gore, turner, Johnson, Peterson, ray rice... Mjd? Stewart? Deangelo Williams? Forte? Charles? I'd put him in a similar tier to pierre thomas - yes good at a lot of things but when it comes down to running, catching, and blocking - and you dont worry about silly things like passing, returns, etc.... All those backs are better runners. Edited October 7, 2010 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Trooth Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 MARSHAWN = NOT A VERY INSTINCTIVE RUNNER. Has all the physical tools. He just doesn't know when, where to run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12 15 11 7 10 11 7 5 14 Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 Gore, turner, Johnson, Peterson, ray rice... Mjd? Stewart? Deangelo Williams? Forte? Charles? I'd put him in a similar tier to pierre thomas - yes good at a lot of things but when it comes down to running, catching, and blocking - and you dont worry about silly things like passing, returns, etc.... All those backs are better runners. I agree that Jackson is far from a top-5 running back. However, Matt Forte? BOTH Carolina backs? MJD - maybe. Running backs are, essentially, as good as the o-line. In that sense, I'd put Freddy up there with almost anyone. 4.5ypc career behind a bunch of scrubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's in My Blood Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 He was a good and strong back but he seemed real slow and not real sure of how to get through the hole. I am not at all saying he was bad because he simply wasn't but the move gets Spiller more carries and Jackson who I would say is in the top five running backs in the league on the field. I am not going to blame the new regime for taking Spiller opposed to a lineman. Spiller was the best player at number nine. If you see something that can change the team you do it. He seemed "choppy" when he hit the hole and could pull off a 5-6 yrd gain but he looked average to me, but who knows what he could do with an average o-line. All I know is we got 2 backs that could easily start on any NFL team and we essentially rid ourselves of a ticking suspension bomb in Lynch and gained a 4th rounder. He's gone and so what. Spiller will be dominant in time and Freddy will be a nice subsitute until C.J. takes over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Lightning Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 MARSHAWN = NOT A VERY INSTINCTIVE RUNNER. Has all the physical tools. He just doesn't know when, where to run. I'd say that has been my observation as well. Freddie has a knack for usng his blockers and finding open space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted October 7, 2010 Share Posted October 7, 2010 I agree that Jackson is far from a top-5 running back. However, Matt Forte? BOTH Carolina backs? MJD - maybe. Running backs are, essentially, as good as the o-line. In that sense, I'd put Freddy up there with almost anyone. 4.5ypc career behind a bunch of scrubs. Thats why they had the ??? After their names. Not gimmes but 5 certainly better and some that people would argue. I'd be careful not to overrate the Carolina, Chicago and jax lines though -- could be a big part of the ?? Being added to those names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts