2020 Our Year For Sure Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 We have THREE running backs for the first three games. McIntyre is a running back. They didn't use him as a fullback AT ALL in the preseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 they have 3 jackson omon mcintyre in an emergency lankster, mcgee and mckelvin can play rb as well. its not a big deal. lynch is only missing 3 games the odds are they wont get hurt. if they do then we will just pick someone up. no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DELLAPELLE JOHN Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 plus lankster palmer corto wendling florence jenkins all have more value than rhodes, they went with the best player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 They also may try to "rent" Rhodes for the second and third weeks. Nobody has picked him up. See the thread on this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I don't care what most teams do. I look at the good teams. They all have depth at RB. Good teams keep 4-5 RBs. Don't get me wrong. The only good things about Rhodes was that he was a proven pro player and put in the time in Rochester to at least know what is going on. He certainly did not impress. I hope they pick up someone serviceable to get through the first 3 games. The Bills in the 90's were pretty good teams. A couple of those years the RB's were Thurman, Davis, and Gardner. As someone stated earlier, McIntyre will be the 3rd RB until Lynch returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJBuffalo Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 The Bills also plan to use McIntyre at RB to some extent, at least, if it become necessary. YES! they did give McIntyre a few series in the pre-season. He looked pretty nimble for a 260 pounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 good question - I want to know why they're keeping three QBs - like if Edwards and Fitz are knocked out Hamdan is going to win it? If you lose your first two QBs you'd be better off letting someone Fred Jackson or Parrish run the Wildcat- then just pick up Hamdam it's not like he's going to be scooped up by another team. The 3rd QB doesn't count for a roster spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endzone Animal Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Maybe the Bills only have 2 RB's, one of whom is more practice squad than NFL calliber, while the other has an injured hand, but so what? Ralph Wilson is $2 million dollars richer today because Rhodes was cut, and besides, the Bills would lose no matter how many RBs were on the roster so might as well save some jack. It's all good in the hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endzone Animal Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 The Bills in the 90's were pretty good teams. A couple of those years the RB's were Thurman, Davis, and Gardner. Wrong. 1990: 5 RBs 1991: 5 RBs 1992: 4 RBs 1993: 5 RBs 1994: 5 RBs 1995: 5 RBs 1996: 5 RBs 1997: 4 RBs 1998: 6 RBs 1999: 5 RBs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 The odds overwhelmingly point to the Bills not needing a 3rd running back for the first 3 games. Go B word about something else. I think you need to go elsewhere to express your anger at life in general. This guy has a very legitimate question. We only kept one mostly unproven back and one totally unproven back and that is it. Most any team, not just the good ones keep at least 3 backs and most 4. Between the management being fubar and Lynch being a thug, they are going to suffer for 3 games. Seems like maybe they would have kept Dominic Rhodes around for at least the first 3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 good question - I want to know why they're keeping three QBs - like if Edwards and Fitz are knocked out Hamdan is going to win it?If you lose your first two QBs you'd be better off letting someone Fred Jackson or Parrish run the Wildcat- then just pick up Hamdam it's not like he's going to be scooped up by another team. Edwards and Fitz aren't going to win it either, so what is the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Wrong. 1990: 5 RBs 1991: 5 RBs 1992: 4 RBs 1993: 5 RBs 1994: 5 RBs 1995: 5 RBs 1996: 5 RBs 1997: 4 RBs 1998: 6 RBs 1999: 5 RBs Sorry, I was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think you need to go elsewhere to express your anger at life in general. This guy has a very legitimate question. We only kept one mostly unproven back and one totally unproven back and that is it. Most any team, not just the good ones keep at least 3 backs and most 4. Between the management being fubar and Lynch being a thug, they are going to suffer for 3 games. Seems like maybe they would have kept Dominic Rhodes around for at least the first 3 games. Sure, it's risky, keeping two. But every team has to play the 53-man, 45-dressing game. Their choice was to keep another position player on the active roster until Lynch returns. When Shaud Williams was the 3rd rb - how much action did he see? It's a dice roll, but personally if I were calling the shots, I'd do what they did - they have some thinness and question marks at other spots. There's many ways to slice up the roster - CIN chose to keep both DD Dorsey and Brian Leonard, and only 1 FB. Dorsey and Leonard both did well in pre-season, and Dorsey showed ST flashes. They have a 2 week exemption for that whale they drafted in the #6 spot, but I think they will keep Dorsey on the team. In any event, it's time to coach and play the players you have. Time to park the "what ifs?" Go with what you got... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 The Bills also plan to use McIntyre at RB to some extent, at least, if it become necessary. Yes, he got plenty of carries during preseason. I see this as a goal line and emergency type thing. I think attacking a 3-4 defense with a big FB running the ball is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruceisloose78 Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think it is a legitmate concern and I don't understand the Bills thinking in letting rhodes go. If jackson goes down we are screwed. Omon cannot pick up a blitz or block to save his life. Why not keep rhodes for the first three games at least. Doesn't make sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robchester Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Don't forget that Josh Reed has been an emergency running back before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endzone Animal Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think it is a legitmate concern and I don't understand the Bills thinking in letting rhodes go. If jackson goes down we are screwed. Omon cannot pick up a blitz or block to save his life. Why not keep rhodes for the first three games at least. Doesn't make sense to me. Think dollars, not sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 It's a risk, no question, but why give an RB a roster spot instead of a better player at another position just because he's an RB? I think that they'll pick up another RB if someone is injured before week 3 (I think that Bruce Hall is still available...). They may even pick up Rhodes in week 2. Barring a disaster scenario with both Jackson and Omon Getting injured in the same game, we'll be ok. If that happens, there will be a lot of passing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Destroyers! Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 hey does anyone know if there's a bacon line around here??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 The 3rd QB doesn't count for a roster spot. Yes, the third string qb does count against the 53 man roster. On game day, the third QB doesn't count against the total of active players allowed, but if they come in, then your first and second qbs are not allowed back in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts