Who starts?

[Matt in KC]

If Jackson does great in Lynch's absence, I agree they stick with the "hot hand". Instead of alternating series: Lynch, Lynch, Jackson, Lynch, Jackson, Lynch, they might well go Lynch, Jackson, Jackson, Lynch, Jackson, Lynch. It would be tragic to see something like that happen to a warrior like Lynch, but I think he's man enough to do what's best for the team.

[ganesh]

So, you think if Jackson accumulates 160 yards in offense, it is because HE has the "hot hand"? I guess the offensive line, playcalling, play of the WRs, etc are all inconsequential. Wouldn't it be fair to assume that if Jackson gained 160 yards, Lynch should do even better? He IS the better RB of the two.

 

Actually, the comparable stats show otherwise. In his limited time, Jackon has actually performed better than Lynch when Lynch was out of the lineup.

[The Dean]

Actually, the comparable stats show otherwise. In his limited time, Jackon has actually performed better than Lynch when Lynch was out of the lineup.

 

 

Apples and oranges. We can't know how Lynch would have performed in those games, as he was not playing.

 

I like Freddie, a lot. He simply isn't the back Lynch is. If he was, he would be starting.

[Guest dog14787]

All we have are stats to compare the two RB's and different folks opinions from watching them. In my opinion it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine Fred Jackson has and could continue to out perform Marshawn Lynch if given the opportunity. Many posters view Marshawn the same way I do, he's a hard runner, but lacks the ability to make something out of nothing and does not have the same receiving skills as Fred Jackson. Fred Jackson is creative and unpredictable and that bodes well for the type of offense the Buffalo Bills want to put on the football field.

 

Fred Jackson, all things considered, is the best RB the Buffalo Bills have in my opinion. I will however admit Dominic Rhodes may have something to say about the situation.

[tbonehawaii]

That would be a wonderful problem to be burdened with.

 

I'd say Lynch on first and second down with Jackson coming in on third.

then we have the same "problem" as the giants

[DrDawkinstein]

So, you think if Jackson accumulates 160 yards in offense, it is because HE has the "hot hand"? I guess the offensive line, playcalling, play of the WRs, etc are all inconsequential. Wouldn't it be fair to assume that if Jackson gained 160 yards, Lynch should do even better? He IS the better RB of the two.

 

thats exactly my feeling on it as well. if the BILLS end up with a running game that averages 160+yds/game, why WOULDNT they see what happens when their starter returns?!?! Jackson isnt going to get those yards all by himself, that rushing average would HAVE to mean that our line is blocking and the play calling is working, at least in the running game.

 

and for anyone saying Fred "outperformed" Marshawn in 2008:

Lynch: 250 attempts, 1036 yards, 4.1 avg, 8 TDs

Jackson: 130 attempts, 571 yards, 4.4 avg, 3 TDs

 

So on half the carries, Freddie got half the yards and half the TDs and averaged about 1 foot more per carry...

[DrDawkinstein]

All we have are stats to compare the two RB's and different folks opinions from watching them. In my opinion it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine Fred Jackson has and could continue to out perform Marshawn Lynch if given the opportunity. Many posters view Marshawn the same way I do, he's a hard runner, but lacks the ability to make something out of nothing and does not have the same receiving skills as Fred Jackson. Fred Jackson is creative and unpredictable and that bodes well for the type of offense the Buffalo Bills want to put on the football field.

 

Fred Jackson, all things considered, is the best RB the Buffalo Bills have in my opinion. I will however admit Dominic Rhodes may have something to say about the situation.

 

youre kidding about that bolded statement, right? cause im pretty sure that i have, on MULTIPLE occassions, watched Marshawn make second, third and fourth efforts and continue to gain yards. I cant find any video of it online, but i seem to recall a TD against Jacksonville that was ALL because of Marshawn's effort.

 

Im not arguing that Jackson isnt a great RB and that he doesnt make the effort as well, but dont sell Marshawn short just because you got a chub about Jackson.

[thebandit27]

All we have are stats to compare the two RB's and different folks opinions from watching them. In my opinion it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine Fred Jackson has and could continue to out perform Marshawn Lynch if given the opportunity. Many posters view Marshawn the same way I do, he's a hard runner, but lacks the ability to make something out of nothing and does not have the same receiving skills as Fred Jackson. Fred Jackson is creative and unpredictable and that bodes well for the type of offense the Buffalo Bills want to put on the football field.

 

Fred Jackson, all things considered, is the best RB the Buffalo Bills have in my opinion. I will however admit Dominic Rhodes may have something to say about the situation.

 

So the guy that's run for over 1,000 yards in each of his 1st two seasons behind one of the worst interior run-blocking offensive lines in football (according to footballoutsiders.com--24th in power blocking in 2008 and 28th in 2007) "lacks the ability to make something out of nothing"? Sorry man, but if you've watched Lynch play you know that 1/2 of the guy's rushing yards come after contact, and a lot of times in contact in the backfield. I'd call that making something out of nothing.

 

Look, I know some people think Jackson has better field vision, can hit the hole quicker, and is a more effective receiver, but statements like the above are just going overboard. If you look at the things that Jackson does more effectively than Lynch, virtually every one of them comes with experience. Field vision? Check. Identifying the hole? Check. Finding soft spots in the defense? Check. There's absolutely no reason to think that Lynch won't improve in those facets of the game with time. However, the abilities that Lynch has--e.g. moving the pile, accelerating through contact, breaking tackles, having a nose for the goal line--aren't learned abilities. They're the kind of skills that a player tends to have or have not, and are--in my opinion--very valuable.

 

As to Jackson's "outperforming" Lynch, the majority of backup RBs will have better per-carry stat lines than the starters, just based on the idea that they're fresher entering a game, they force the defense to adjust to a different running style, and they sustain less wear-and-tear during a given game/season. Here are just a few examples:

 

Felix Jones (8.9 ypc) vs. Tashard Choice (5.1 ypc) vs. Marion Barber (3.7 ypc)

Derrick Ward (5.6 ypc) vs. Brandon Jacobs (5.0 ypc)

Brandon Jackson (5.5 ypc) vs. Ryan Grant (3.9 ypc)

Darren Sproles (5.4 ypc) vs. L.T. (3.8 ypc)

Correll Buckhalter (4.9 ypc) vs. Brian Westbrook (4.0 ypc)

Kevin Faulk (6.1 ypc) vs. Sammy Morris (4.7 ypc)

 

And there are many, many more to choose from. In almost every case, the backup's per-carry stat line is significantly better than the starter. Now either that's a function of their lesser roles in the offense, or there are upwards of 20 coaching staffs that don't have a clue how much better their backup RBs are than their starters.

 

But to answer the OP: Lynch starts and Jackson gets carries, just like it is right now.

[billybob]

I think for a limited amount of carries Fred Jackson could do as well or even a little better than Lynch but could he sustain? that's the question, there are a lot of backs who can look like world beaters for a couple games then as they take a pounding their performance deteriorates, - I'm really glad we have Jackson and Rhodes too but I don't know if either of them could handle the workload that Lynch can.