Jump to content

Spiller not doing to Bad!!!


Recommended Posts

Actually it's not. RB is the position with the shortest learning curve and rookie RBs have traditionally had a high rate of return in their rookie year. Almost no matter where you take them. 2nd RD RBs (MJD comes to mind) have been as productive as 1st, even 3rd and 4th rounders. Hell, even UDFA like Freddie. Which is why the RB position is the most overrated position in the modern NFL. You can find them ANYWHERE for cheap. The days of the single work horse RB are over. It's a tandem now. A cheap tandem.

 

Which is why picking a RB with the number 9 pick, no matter how good he is, when you already had 2 Pro Bowl caliber backs on the roster and multiple gaping holes at several key positions was a catastrophic f*&k-up for the front office. But they made the choice, so we have to deal with it. But then to take the 9th pick and NOT play him is even worse. The kid should be learning on the field, especially when your team is a miserable 4-10 and has no shot at the playoffs.

 

CJ Spiller has been a huge disappointment in his rookie year. There's no other way to color it. He needed to come in and be a game breaker from day one to validate the pick by the front office. He didn't. Don't make excuses now.

 

That doesn't mean he won't become a good back. But it's not a good sign that he is taking this long to adjust when RB is the easiest position to adjust to in the NFL. As history has repeatedly shown.

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiller as quitly gained 1331.4 all purpose yards this year with two games left.

 

The remaining two game could easily amount to another 200 yards, for a projected total of 1500 +.

 

Not to bad I would say with his limited role.

 

 

Just an opinion.

 

Make that 351 yards rushing and receiving with low average gains. Your spin on the numbers is decieving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he was horrible out of the backfield against the dolphins. i realize the entire run game was ineffective and chan said the o-line blew the schemes, but there were a few times where he could have squared his shoulders through a soft little seam for 3 - 5, but instead he just fiddle-faddled himself laterally, then backwards. he's got to learn he can make it to the second level between the tackles, not just around the end. he also takes too long to try to make people miss. he needs to be more efficient, like freddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiller was drafted for the future.

No it was not a ploy by Ralph to sell tickets.

What he does this year is gravy.

I can't prove it but it's pretty clear to me and many other reasonably level-headed Bills fans

I'm betting if you put a gun to their heads Gailey and Nix would still be happy if Spiller didn't see the field at all this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiller was drafted for the future.

No it was not a ploy by Ralph to sell tickets.

What he does this year is gravy.

I can't prove it but it's pretty clear to me and many other reasonably level-headed Bills fans

I'm betting if you put a gun to their heads Gailey and Nix would still be happy if Spiller didn't see the field at all this season.

 

If you wanna draft a RB for the FUTURE, then don't waste a top 10 draft pick for it. That's just fckin retarded. You're saying we're paying a RB all that money so he can be used in the future? That is the biggest load of crp I've ever heard. No team would take a RB in the top 10 and save him for the future.

 

If you wanna draft a RB for the future, then you do it in the later rounds, not with a top 10 pick. Unless you're a QB, u take a player in the top 10 to play NOW.

 

I've heard it all. :wallbash:

 

If you're a RB that was taken in the top 10, and you're not on the field, then you're not doing your job. Coaches won't SAVE a secret weapon for the future. This is how it works...

 

You do well in training camp, and in practice. You get playing time. You improve in games, then coach will give you more carries.

 

That's just how the game operates. You honestly think the Vikings would've "SAVED" Peterson for the future? You think the Saints would've SAVED Bush for the future?

Edited by DreReed83
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you wanna draft a RB for the FUTURE, then don't waste a top 10 draft pick for it. That's just fckin retarded. You're saying we're paying a RB all that money so he can be used in the future? That is the biggest load of crp I've ever heard. No team would take a RB in the top 10 and save him for the future.

 

If you wanna draft a RB for the future, then you do it in the later rounds, not with a top 10 pick. Unless you're a QB, u take a player in the top 10 to play NOW.

 

I've heard it all. :wallbash:

 

If you're a RB that was taken in the top 10, and you're not on the field, then you're not doing your job. Coaches won't SAVE a secret weapon for the future. This is how it works...

 

You do well in training camp, and in practice. You get playing time. You improve in games, then coach will give you more carries.

 

That's just how the game operates. You honestly think the Vikings would've "SAVED" Peterson for the future? You think the Saints would've SAVED Bush for the future?

 

 

I don't think they'd admit it, but yes he was drafted for the future and was the best player available and a game breaker type of play-maker...Yes better than the 3rd Tackle. They knew they weren't going anywhere this year, and money was certainly not an issue. Again, many reasonable fans I know agree... not all mind you. Bush was not drafted to be a savior in year one either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they'd admit it, but yes he was drafted for the future and was the best player available and a game breaker type of play-maker...Yes better than the 3rd Tackle. They knew they weren't going anywhere this year, and money was certainly not an issue. Again, many reasonable fans I know agree... not all mind you. Bush was not drafted to be a savior in year one either.

 

If you truly believe this then I feel really really really really really sorry for you. No team in their right mind would EVER save a RB for the future like that. If you produce you play. Not that difficult to comprehend.

 

He wasn't the best player available, Dez Bryant was, and he's outproduced him in ever way possible. Punt returns, touchdowns, and it's MUCH harder to produce as a rookie WR than it is for a rookie RB. So save yourself that bullsht.

 

YOU BRINGING UP BUSH???

 

REGGIE BUSH - 565 YDS RUSHING, 742 RDS RECEIVING, 88 RECEPTIONS, 8 TDS.

 

CJ SPILLER - 248 YDS RUSHING, 22 RECEPTIONS, 103 YDS AND 1 TD

 

 

Almost twice as many rushing yds, about 6 times more receiving yds, 4 times more receptions, and 8 times more TD's.

 

 

Saints didn't hold back in using Bush. TRUST ME. Saints found ways to get Bush on the field because they knew he could play. Not because they were "saving him for the future." That is the DUMBEST thing I've EVER heard in my entire life.

Edited by DreReed83
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiller hasn't proven anything yet. Potential won't even get you cheap coffee at McDonald's. When he produces he'll get kudos, but I'm waiting to see what he's worth. As I said before...he's a bust until he's not a bust. I'll be happy if gets over 100 yards a game in the next two games or if he produces a very good season next year...but being a 9 pick and highly paid doesn't cut the mustard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little difference in the two OLs?

 

Ask Bill which RB he would rather have?

The Bills and the pats have nearly identical rushing numbers this year. It can't be that thier O-line is superior in run blocking.

 

Nope--the difference is in the value we got from a 1st round RB vs a guy like Woodhead.

 

Drafting a RB in the first round is foolish--unless he is the last position of weakness you need to fill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you truly believe this then I feel really really really really really sorry for you. No team in their right mind would EVER save a RB for the future like that. If you produce you play. Not that difficult to comprehend.

 

He wasn't the best player available, Dez Bryant was, and he's outproduced him in ever way possible. Punt returns, touchdowns, and it's MUCH harder to produce as a rookie WR than it is for a rookie RB. So save yourself that bullsht.

 

YOU BRINGING UP BUSH???

 

REGGIE BUSH - 565 YDS RUSHING, 742 RDS RECEIVING, 88 RECEPTIONS, 8 TDS.

 

CJ SPILLER - 248 YDS RUSHING, 22 RECEPTIONS, 103 YDS AND 1 TD

 

 

Almost twice as many rushing yds, about 6 times more receiving yds, 4 times more receptions, and 8 times more TD's.

 

 

Saints didn't hold back in using Bush. TRUST ME. Saints found ways to get Bush on the field because they knew he could play. Not because they were "saving him for the future." That is the DUMBEST thing I've EVER heard in my entire life.

 

Sorry , Still think what I'm saying is true. Your capital letters, name-calling and stats didn't convince me otherwise. Also, nowhere did I say they were "saving him" re: Spiller or Bush... If he got on the field, so be it... If not so much, that's ok too. because they knew they weren't winning football games this year. This is the 1st year of an actual building project. Something that hasn't been attempted since early in the Donahoe era. It's been patches and band-aids since then. And Bush wasn't forced on the field either, but they didn't know about the quality of the other backs there quite yet in his 1st year.

Anyway, I'm quite sure of what I'm saying being true... as sure as one can be without working in the organization. B-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry , Still think what I'm saying is true. Your capital letters, name-calling and stats didn't convince me otherwise. Also, nowhere did I say they were "saving him" re: Spiller or Bush... If he got on the field, so be it... If not so much, that's ok too. because they knew they weren't winning football games this year. This is the 1st year of an actual building project. Something that hasn't been attempted since early in the Donahoe era. It's been patches and band-aids since then. And Bush wasn't forced on the field either, but they didn't know about the quality of the other backs there quite yet in his 1st year.

Anyway, I'm quite sure of what I'm saying being true... as sure as one can be without working in the organization. B-)

 

I could care less what you think cuz i KNOW you're wrong. That's the difference. I KNOW you're wrong. You THINK you're right. Whatever. You brought up Bush in comparison to the situation here. And my point was that he wasn't being saved for anything.

 

That's the difference between your posts and mine. I back up my statements with facts, and you keep feeding this bullsht of stuff you can't even prove and just doesn't make sense.

 

Lastly i never namecalled. I called you posts dumb, which they are, but never did i insult YOU. :thumbsup:

 

Whether the team is winning or not, players who produce get on the field. No team SAVES players for the future. This concept you have is just mindblowing. It really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spiller not doing to Bad!!!

 

He isn't doing too good either!!!!!

 

Sounds like alot of yards, but when you have a defense that for awhile was giving up at least 40 points a game, that is a lot of kick returns, of which your average return man gets 25-30 yards on every return. Bottom line so far, he is one of if not the biggest bust from the entire first round of the 2010 NFL Draft, if not the draft in it's entirety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could care less what you think cuz i KNOW you're wrong. That's the difference. I KNOW you're wrong. You THINK you're right. Whatever. You brought up Bush in comparison to the situation here. And my point was that he wasn't being saved for anything.

 

That's the difference between your posts and mine. I back up my statements with facts, and you keep feeding this bullsht of stuff you can't even prove and just doesn't make sense.

 

Lastly i never namecalled. I called you posts dumb, which they are, but never did i insult YOU. :thumbsup:

 

Whether the team is winning or not, players who produce get on the field. No team SAVES players for the future. This concept you have is just mindblowing. It really is.

 

Nah... I would never say I "know" . I'll leave that to you. You can't back up what you're saying about Spiller as fact just the same. Not one thing you said proves that. Saying you know doesn't cut it. It's not a tough concept really... You organize a business plan within your organization to regain a measure of long term success. A draft pick comes a long that is a game-breaker whom you think will help you greatly as that plan comes to life, even though you already have a couple really good guys at his position. He is rated higher on your draft board by a mile than any other player thats up there still....so you take him. As you begin to implement season 1 of the plan, you are not too concerned with wether he is approved by fans with little to no attention span or long term view. You hope he gets in there, learns a little, get's used to the speed of the NFL. Your goal however is for him to be ready when your team is ready to make a run for real contention. And please don't generalize about my posts... I've seen hundreds of you come and go since the early days of this board. Move on to something else if my opinion or concept is too mindblowing for you to jive with. Opinions are encouraged here. So in saying that, I understand your 'opinion' and if you have nothing to add then just move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd also like to point out that Spiller's return numbers are okay, but not great. His kickoff return average is 24.3 with 1 TD. Among players with at least 10 returns, his average ranks 20th. 15 players have returned at least 1 kickoff for a TD, and 21 total kickoffs have been returned for TDs. Spiller has 2 kickoff returns of 40+ yards (including the TD), which ties him for 17th in the league. Purely as a kickoff returner, Spiller is about average.

 

On punts, he's done a little better, but with a very small sample size. His average is 14.6 with a long of 34. Among players with at least 9 returns (Spiller has only returned 9 punts so far), that average ranks 5th. Three of Spiller's 9 returns have been for 20+ yards, which is probably the second-highest percentage in the league*, and probably won't hold up. Still, his 3 20+ yard returns rank him tied for 9th in the league. No 40+ yard returns or TDs to date.

 

*Bryan McCann, who took over punt returns for Dallas when Dez Bryant got hurt, has been sick. He's only returned 4 punts, but 1 was a 97 yard TD and two others went over 20 yards. He's currently averaging 34.5 yards a return. I don't expect either that average or his 75% rate of 20+ yard returns to hold up.

 

NFL.com stats

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah... I would never say I "know" . I'll leave that to you. You can't back up what you're saying about Spiller as fact just the same. Not one thing you said proves that. Saying you know doesn't cut it. It's not a tough concept really... You organize a business plan within your organization to regain a measure of long term success. A draft pick comes a long that is a game-breaker whom you think will help you greatly as that plan comes to life, even though you already have a couple really good guys at his position. He is rated higher on your draft board by a mile than any other player thats up there still....so you take him. As you begin to implement season 1 of the plan, you are not too concerned with wether he is approved by fans with little to no attention span or long term view. You hope he gets in there, learns a little, get's used to the speed of the NFL. Your goal however is for him to be ready when your team is ready to make a run for real contention. And please don't generalize about my posts... I've seen hundreds of you come and go since the early days of this board. Move on to something else if my opinion or concept is too mindblowing for you to jive with. Opinions are encouraged here. So in saying that, I understand your 'opinion' and if you have nothing to add then just move on.

 

I think this is a good point - the coaching staff didn't bring him in this year to be the focal point of the offense, but to bring him along and get him ready to be a long-term weapon. I'm fine with that, but the problem is that I think even that plan is severely behind schedule given Spiller's performance this year. I think it's okay that he hasn't taken the job away from Fred Jackson, but right now, he's really struggling to move the ball forward at all. There are excuses - he's adjusting, the line isn't opening holes for him, etc. And they're accurate. But even given those factors, his play has been hugely disappointing. RBs who look that bad in their first years rarely turn it around as they mature (There are a lot of William Greens for every Darren McFadden).

 

I'm not going to rake Chix over the coals for the selection, sometimes you have to swing for the homerun, and they made a lot of other good moves that can excuse it. But I hope that their first draft pick turns it around next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't put too much stock in pre-season performances (otherwise Joique Bell would be a Pro Bowler), or what Gailey said after a pre-season game. Spiller was met in the backfield 4 times against the Dols. That's on the O-line, not Spiller.

Very good point, the offensive line, although a bit better since Wood took over center, has not gotten any push

in ions, and if that is not obvious to anybody watching a Bills game, then I will let you borrow my glasses.

Jackson didn't do much better against the fins, or all year for that matter, and that is not an indightment

on Freddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this thread, I've realized two things:

 

1. Spiller is doing just fine. People want to compare him to other players on other teams. You can't do that. Every team is different. Every situation is different. The only thing you can do is compare him to other players on the Bills. His numbers are VERY comparable to F. Jackson. Jackson's rushing yds is 4.1 per attempt compared to Spillers 3.8. Jackson has 7 TD's in the last 433 carries (1 TD per 62 carries), Spiller has 65 carries for 0 TD's. Jackson has 28 catches for 2 TD's (6.8yds/per) , Spiller has 22 for 1 (4.7yds/per). Jacksons career punt return navg is 14.2, Spiller 14.6. Jackson's kick return average is 22.2yds/per, Spiller is 24.3. So, the people bitching about Spiller should also be bitching about Freddy. Having a clone of Freddy on this team is good news for me! I'll take an entire team of them!

 

2. The people complaining about Spiller are not really complaining about Spiller. They are complaining about the Spiller PICK and how he's being used (or not used) in this offense. And they have the right too, however, the pick did make sense. They must have viewed him as the best player available and we all knew Marshawn was only one mistake away from a year off. Also, Spiller on this team made Lynch a trade candidate with a few games into the season. I'm guessing the FO knew this going into the draft. Why else did Marshawn start the first two games? A fourth rounder for Lynch was a steal for the Bills IMO. Sure, a number 9 pick is pretty high for a RB when we had other immediate needs, but it seems to me that winning immediately this year was not on the FO's mind during the draft.

 

Now, that being said, I did not like the pick at the time. I (like most fans) want to win now! However, I will take 4 wins this year with the project of building a playoff team in the near future as opposed to more 7-9 consecutive seasons! (if that project started this past April)

Edited by SoggyHog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

2. The people complaining about Spiller are not really complaining about Spiller. They are complaining about the Spiller PICK and how he's being used (or not used) in this offense. And they have the right too, however, the pick did make sense. They must have viewed him as the best player available and we all knew Marshawn was only one mistake away from a year off. Also, Spiller on this team made Lynch a trade candidate with a few games into the season. I'm guessing the FO knew this going into the draft. Why else did Marshawn start the first two games? A fourth rounder for Lynch was a steal for the Bills IMO. Sure, a number 9 pick is pretty high for a RB when we had other immediate needs, but it seems to me that winning immediately this year was not on the FO's mind during the draft.

 

No. It didn't make sense. That's the whole point. It was an absolute catastrophic f*&k-up that highlights an even bigger problem in the front office. One that no one is talking much about because they aren't seeing the forest through the trees. It's a problem that will set this team back another few years -- maybe longer. I said it when they made the pick and the actions after the fact have born out that truth.

 

Look at the evidence ... if they picked Spiller because they were afraid of losing Marshawn, that's fine. But then why didn't they trade Marshawn when his value was the highest? They could have moved him during the draft and paved the way for Spiller to get more reps in camp and the preseason and smooth his transition to the NFL. But they didn't. They kept Marshawn and, according to multiple reports, made no effort to move him during the pre season. Then, when GB, a legit super bowl contender got bit by the injury bug, Marshawn's value was at it's peak. Again, the Bills did nothing. They didn't act. Why? Many thought they were playing hardball. But then when they dealt Marshawn to the Seahawks for a sack of nickles and a couple of jock straps we learned that they hadn't even contacted the Packers about a deal. That's criminal by this front office and shows just how terribly managed this club is.

 

Still, even if you want to make the argument that hindsight is 20/20 and that maybe the Bills DID make efforts to move Marshawn earlier (which even the Bills denied at the time), you can't forgive how poorly managed Spiller has been since he's been on the team. I could forgive the pick, forgive the failure to get the best value for Marshawn, I could forgive all of that if Spiller was being properly developed. But he isn't. He gets less than 10 carries a game. Less than 15 touches a game. That's INSANE. It's poor management, poor coaching and poor development. That speaks to the bigger problem, the underlying one.

 

Namely, this front office, from Wilson to Nix on down, has no clue how to build a winning football team in the modern NFL. The winning teams know that the days of a workhorse RB are over. Anyone who takes a RB in the top 15 is living in the stone age. You need 2 RBs to maintain the workload in the NFL today. The shelf life of a modern RB is too short to risk only having one on your roster and it's too short to tie up a large amount of your cap space in one position. Teams have moved from high profile, top picks at RB who anchor their teams to finding CHEAPER, just as talented players in later rounds, free agency and off the scrap heap. Look at Hillis. Where did he come from? Freddie came from NFL Europe! MJD was a 2nd rounder. The fact that this new front office with it's first pick in a rebuilding year chose a RB at the number 9 pick was a clear sign that they don't have a clue. They're dinosaurs -- and not just because Nix is old. It's the mentality that's old. And it's a shame because it means with these jokers in charge, things aren't going to get better until they clean house AGAIN.

 

But let's, for the sake of argument, assume I'm wrong in that above statement. Let's assume that it's not dinosaur thinking to take a RB that high in the draft. There are exceptions to that of course, like if your team is just one player away from a legit Super Bowl run -- which clearly the Bills were not. Still, if you invest all that money and all those resources into a number 9 pick at RB then you have to play him. You just have to. The only way you don't play him is if he's a total bust and your team is in contention for the playoffs. The Bills were never in contention for the playoffs. They were never in contention for anything this year. Picking Spiller was bad. But sitting Spiller is criminal.

 

This is the bigger problem. It's not the pick itself, it's what the pick represents. It represents that the new front office of Nix and company are clueless as to how to build a winning football team. The way they handled the Trent situation, to the Spiller pick, to the Green signing, was an absolute embarrassment and gives me zero faith in their abilities to build a winning franchise.

 

THAT'S the problem that no one is talking about. The Spiller pick was just a symptom of a larger issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. It didn't make sense. That's the whole point. It was an absolute catastrophic f*&k-up that highlights an even bigger problem in the front office. One that no one is talking much about because they aren't seeing the forest through the trees. It's a problem that will set this team back another few years -- maybe longer. I said it when they made the pick and the actions after the fact have born out that truth.

 

Look at the evidence ... if they picked Spiller because they were afraid of losing Marshawn, that's fine. But then why didn't they trade Marshawn when his value was the highest? They could have moved him during the draft and paved the way for Spiller to get more reps in camp and the preseason and smooth his transition to the NFL. But they didn't. They kept Marshawn and, according to multiple reports, made no effort to move him during the pre season. Then, when GB, a legit super bowl contender got bit by the injury bug, Marshawn's value was at it's peak. Again, the Bills did nothing. They didn't act. Why? Many thought they were playing hardball. But then when they dealt Marshawn to the Seahawks for a sack of nickles and a couple of jock straps we learned that they hadn't even contacted the Packers about a deal. That's criminal by this front office and shows just how terribly managed this club is.

 

Still, even if you want to make the argument that hindsight is 20/20 and that maybe the Bills DID make efforts to move Marshawn earlier (which even the Bills denied at the time), you can't forgive how poorly managed Spiller has been since he's been on the team. I could forgive the pick, forgive the failure to get the best value for Marshawn, I could forgive all of that if Spiller was being properly developed. But he isn't. He gets less than 10 carries a game. Less than 15 touches a game. That's INSANE. It's poor management, poor coaching and poor development. That speaks to the bigger problem, the underlying one.

 

Namely, this front office, from Wilson to Nix on down, has no clue how to build a winning football team in the modern NFL. The winning teams know that the days of a workhorse RB are over. Anyone who takes a RB in the top 15 is living in the stone age. You need 2 RBs to maintain the workload in the NFL today. The shelf life of a modern RB is too short to risk only having one on your roster and it's too short to tie up a large amount of your cap space in one position. Teams have moved from high profile, top picks at RB who anchor their teams to finding CHEAPER, just as talented players in later rounds, free agency and off the scrap heap. Look at Hillis. Where did he come from? Freddie came from NFL Europe! MJD was a 2nd rounder. The fact that this new front office with it's first pick in a rebuilding year chose a RB at the number 9 pick was a clear sign that they don't have a clue. They're dinosaurs -- and not just because Nix is old. It's the mentality that's old. And it's a shame because it means with these jokers in charge, things aren't going to get better until they clean house AGAIN.

 

But let's, for the sake of argument, assume I'm wrong in that above statement. Let's assume that it's not dinosaur thinking to take a RB that high in the draft. There are exceptions to that of course, like if your team is just one player away from a legit Super Bowl run -- which clearly the Bills were not. Still, if you invest all that money and all those resources into a number 9 pick at RB then you have to play him. You just have to. The only way you don't play him is if he's a total bust and your team is in contention for the playoffs. The Bills were never in contention for the playoffs. They were never in contention for anything this year. Picking Spiller was bad. But sitting Spiller is criminal.

 

This is the bigger problem. It's not the pick itself, it's what the pick represents. It represents that the new front office of Nix and company are clueless as to how to build a winning football team. The way they handled the Trent situation, to the Spiller pick, to the Green signing, was an absolute embarrassment and gives me zero faith in their abilities to build a winning franchise.

 

THAT'S the problem that no one is talking about. The Spiller pick was just a symptom of a larger issue.

 

 

I agree with you to a point, however, you are not talking about Spiller (which is point of this thread) you are complaining about the pick and the ineptitude of the FO. I think what has most people (including you and me) in an uproar about is the wasting of a number 9 pick on a RB who is not touching the ball, when we didn't "need" a RB and we had/have needs elsewhere. However, my point was and is: he is having a very comparable year to the other running backs who are, and were, on this team. Regardless of where he was picked (and I know 9 was too high) he is having a decent year. He is a rookie on a 4 win team under a completely new coaching staff. It is going to take some time. I doubt most RB's in the league would produce much more on this team this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you to a point, however, you are not talking about Spiller (which is point of this thread) you are complaining about the pick and the ineptitude of the FO. I think what has most people (including you and me) in an uproar about is the wasting of a number 9 pick on a RB who is not touching the ball, when we didn't "need" a RB and we had/have needs elsewhere. However, my point was and is: he is having a very comparable year to the other running backs who are, and were, on this team. Regardless of where he was picked (and I know 9 was too high) he is having a decent year. He is a rookie on a 4 win team under a completely new coaching staff. It is going to take some time. I doubt most RB's in the league would produce much more on this team this year.

But see, I think that you're standards are far too low. 9th pick or not, he is NOT having a good year as a RB. 1 TD, less than 500 yards rushing. That's JV numbers. RB is the position with the fastest learning curve. Players come right in from college and perform. Spiller hasn't.

 

Some of that is because he simply isn't seeing the field. Some is because he is having a tougher than normal time adjusting to life in the NFL. That's not opinion. That's the facts based on his production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah... I would never say I "know" . I'll leave that to you. You can't back up what you're saying about Spiller as fact just the same. Not one thing you said proves that. Saying you know doesn't cut it. It's not a tough concept really... You organize a business plan within your organization to regain a measure of long term success. A draft pick comes a long that is a game-breaker whom you think will help you greatly as that plan comes to life, even though you already have a couple really good guys at his position. He is rated higher on your draft board by a mile than any other player thats up there still....so you take him. As you begin to implement season 1 of the plan, you are not too concerned with wether he is approved by fans with little to no attention span or long term view. You hope he gets in there, learns a little, get's used to the speed of the NFL. Your goal however is for him to be ready when your team is ready to make a run for real contention. And please don't generalize about my posts... I've seen hundreds of you come and go since the early days of this board. Move on to something else if my opinion or concept is too mindblowing for you to jive with. Opinions are encouraged here. So in saying that, I understand your 'opinion' and if you have nothing to add then just move on.

 

Yes, you leave that up to ME, because that logic is total BS. Coaches will ALWAYS put the best players on the field that put the team in the best position to win. They will NEVER hold out and put a good/great player on the bench for future purposes. That's mindblowing that you even think that.

 

Yes, you organize a plan to regain a measure of long term success. What does that have anything to do with sitting a "good" player on the bench? If you want a long term success and see one of your players as being a part of it, then you PLAY him and give him game EXPERIENCE. How is a player to get experience while rotting on the bench? Are u freakin kidding me? The best way to improve as a team is to grow as a team and PLAY. I know that logic is very difficult to you. More game time and playing time = experience and improvement. SHOCKER. I know. Stick with me though. I know this logic is probably hurting your head right about now.

 

Everything else you're babbling about doesn't make sense. The ONLY way to get better is game experience. Practice only gets you so far. Training camp only gets you so far. The only way to get better as a player is to play in a GAME. This doesn't help him at all.

 

And you wanna talk about saving him for the future? If that's the case, then Spiller has lost 2 years of game experience because most likely there won't be an NFL season next year because of the lockout. So he won't play next year either, and he'll come into his 3rd year rusty.

 

GOOD LOGIC :thumbdown:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

where would have drafted adrian peterson?

I wouldn't have.

 

That's the point. The only time you draft a RB in the first round is if he's the missing piece for a Super Bowl run. You could argue he was a big boost for the Vikings. He's one of the best backs in the league. But how many Super Bowls have the Vikings won with him?

 

Yeah. RBs don't win Super Bowls anymore. This isn't the 80s. It's 2010. It's a pass first league now. You need to manage the cap and allocate more room for WRs, QBs, TEs, and Pass protectors (and conversely DBs and Pass Rushers) which limits the amount teams can afford to spend on RBs. Taking a RB in the first round, let alone HIGH in the first round means you're locking up a large portion of your cap to one player at one position that is quickly becoming a two man job. That's why it's far more prudent to find a RB anywhere BUT the first round since they're cheaper and easier to get away from when they get hurt or run out of tred on their tires.

 

The people that don't understand this are the old timers who don't understand that the game has changed in the past 5 to 10 years. Old timers like the ones running this team.

Edited by tgreg99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe on returns, but not many miss in the backfield.

 

Bellichick picked up a rookie RB out of the Jets training camp dumpster who is far outplaying our 1st round draft pick. 435 yards rushing (5.3 per) and 347 receiving (10.7) 5 TDs. Spiller's got 248 (3.9), 103 (4.7) and 1 TD.

 

Go figure.

 

DUH !!!! Established O line - Established #1 QB - Top Offense for years - Established Offensive scheme & personal -- Give ole Bellichek CJ with all he's got & see what he does with him & then put that up against Woodhead .

 

It's not at all fair when you compare a top 5 Offense to a coach coming in with a brand new Offensive scheme in his first year as this teams coach NO WAY can you compare the 2 that's just being foolish or having little or no common sense what so ever !!!!!!

 

THIS HAS TO BE THE WORST REPLY I'VE EVER READ ON HERE MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE WHAT SO EVER :thumbdown: !!!!!!!

Edited by T master
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't have.

 

That's the point. The only time you draft a RB in the first round is if he's the missing piece for a Super Bowl run. You could argue he was a big boost for the Vikings. He's one of the best backs in the league. But how many Super Bowls have the Vikings won with him?

 

Yeah. RBs don't win Super Bowls anymore. This isn't the 80s. It's 2010. It's a pass first league now. You need to manage the cap and allocate more room for WRs, QBs, TEs, and Pass protectors (and conversely DBs and Pass Rushers) which limits the amount teams can afford to spend on RBs. Taking a RB in the first round, let alone HIGH in the first round means you're locking up a large portion of your cap to one player at one position that is quickly becoming a two man job. That's why it's far more prudent to find a RB anywhere BUT the first round since they're cheaper and easier to get away from when they get hurt or run out of tred on their tires.

 

The people that don't understand this are the old timers who don't understand that the game has changed in the past 5 to 10 years. Old timers like the ones running this team.

 

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

 

I think the biggest value for a great running back is when you can give the guy the ball on 3rd and 3, with a lead, in the 4th quarter, and know he's going to convert. You pass to get ahead, you run to finish the game. That's not the guy CJ Spiller is, sadly, though there are certainly important roles for him to play in the first three quarters. And we can worry about what we do with a lead in the 4th quarter when we keep having them. But I'm far more sympathetic to taking a power back in the first round than a speedy guy.

 

As to the weather, I used to agree with you, but I keep seeing QBs have great games in snowy conditions. I refuse to believe it's true, but I think QB arms are getting stronger, and fields are getting better, and the result is that speed offenses work better than ever before on cold days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you take the climate into account at all when you post something like the above?

 

Btw, I am in full agreement wrt drafting rbs in round 1. I do however strongly feel that running the football is more important in the elements than it is in a dome or in warm weather. This of course involves blocking.

I tend to agree with Mike below -- that the game has changed to such an extent that the weather isn't as big of a factor as it once was. Sure, it matters when there's a freak storm like Cleveland v Buffalo a few years ago. But that's rare. And besides, the Super Bowl is played in warm weather / no snow. And the point is to win the Super Bowl ...

 

But also, I don't mean to imply that RBs aren't important or that the running game itself is useless. It's just not AS important as it was for the first 60 plus years of the NFL. And, further more, the main point is that since RBs are a dime a dozen these days with teams not willing to spend huge chunks of their cap on them, you can find a very good, even great back, from anywhere. Throw a rock at the combine in April and you'll hit six or seven. Every year. So even if elements are more important than Mike and I are saying, which is very possible, you can still find a good enough back to win in the snow and rain without picking in the 1st round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you leave that up to ME, because that logic is total BS. Coaches will ALWAYS put the best players on the field that put the team in the best position to win. They will NEVER hold out and put a good/great player on the bench for future purposes. That's mindblowing that you even think that.

 

Yes, you organize a plan to regain a measure of long term success. What does that have anything to do with sitting a "good" player on the bench? If you want a long term success and see one of your players as being a part of it, then you PLAY him and give him game EXPERIENCE. How is a player to get experience while rotting on the bench? Are u freakin kidding me? The best way to improve as a team is to grow as a team and PLAY. I know that logic is very difficult to you. More game time and playing time = experience and improvement. SHOCKER. I know. Stick with me though. I know this logic is probably hurting your head right about now.

 

Everything else you're babbling about doesn't make sense. The ONLY way to get better is game experience. Practice only gets you so far. Training camp only gets you so far. The only way to get better as a player is to play in a GAME. This doesn't help him at all.

 

And you wanna talk about saving him for the future? If that's the case, then Spiller has lost 2 years of game experience because most likely there won't be an NFL season next year because of the lockout. So he won't play next year either, and he'll come into his 3rd year rusty.

 

GOOD LOGIC :thumbdown:

 

If it were coaches making all the decisions in the NFL there would be no such thing as long term planning. Coaches are only 'somewhat' involved in such thinking at best in general. Other than that, repeating what you already said isn't really adding anything here. Big picture scenarios are real things that Gm's and Owners employ throughout the NFL, regardless of the perspective of coaches and fans at times. I'm sorry you don't see the lack of concern for Spiller's immediate production coming from multiple angles within the organization. More of your "facts" you list are actually opinions just like everybody else. "Teams will NEVER Bla bla bla" whatever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it were coaches making all the decisions in the NFL there would be no such thing as long term planning. Coaches are only 'somewhat' involved in such thinking at best in general. Other than that, repeating what you already said isn't really adding anything here. Big picture scenarios are real things that Gm's and Owners employ throughout the NFL, regardless of the perspective of coaches and fans at times. I'm sorry you don't see the lack of concern for Spiller's immediate production coming from multiple angles within the organization. More of your "facts" you list are actually opinions just like everybody else. "Teams will NEVER Bla bla bla" whatever

 

zzzzzzzzzzz...you still talkin? Sorry you can't see that Spiller isn't producing. And when he's a 3rd year veteran with half a year of game experience, that will be a huge step back in his development.

 

How many yds per carry did he average last time? 1.8 or something? 2.9 yds per carry the last 2 games? Around 4.1 yds per touch for the season on offense? Yup. I see potential there. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

zzzzzzzzzzz...you still talkin? Sorry you can't see that Spiller isn't producing. And when he's a 3rd year veteran with half a year of game experience, that will be a huge step back in his development.

 

How many yds per carry did he average last time? 1.8 or something? 2.9 yds per carry the last 2 games? Around 4.1 yds per touch for the season on offense? Yup. I see potential there. :thumbsup:

 

Yawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...