Jackson or Lynch

[rstencel]

If Jackson were a couple of years younger, I say trade Lynch for a high draft pick or a need position, if at all possible.

 

Problem is he's going on 29 years old - close to the time RBs often hit the wall. He may have a year or two of equal productivity left. After that, he'll start to look average.

 

Lynch is a douchebag nitwit who needs to grow up. You're a professional now a-hole. Act like it. Maybe acting all gangsta was a good defense mechanism back in the hood, but time to put that act behind you.

 

Apart from the character issue, his running style is not very fluid. He's great at churning out those extra yards with 3 defenders wrapped around him (the anti-Antowain Smith), but he's slow to hit the holes and takes too long to hit full speed.

 

Jackson, on the other hand, sees the field, adjusts well, runs with patience (overused cliché, but true), and has a good burst when he sees an opening. Besides that, I think he's a better receiver and a whole lot smarter.

 

 

If the question were, "if you could have only one of them, who would it be?", my answer would be Freddie.

 

It's a bloody shame the Bills weren't able to draft a few picks higher when the took Lynch. Can you imagine the Bills skill level with Adrian Peterson (and Fred)?

 

If you believe the pre draft rumors, the Bills were rumored to like Lynch better than Peterson, and would have chosen Lynch even if Peterson was still on the board. Find that hard to believe, but have seen them make worse evaluations.

[rstencel]

In response to the bolded Bandit, my conclusions didn't come from watching the Monday Night game...I think you know me better than that. Including preseason, we've watched Jackson play in probably 30 games for the Bills. That's enough to get to know a player.

 

If I looked up their career stats, I'd bet that Jackson also has a higher yards per carry and a higher yards per reception.

 

But that's not relevant either. My observations of their skills over the last two plus years make me think Jackson is a better running back.

 

 

Jackson has more carries out of spread formations and long yardage situations that Lynch. Lynch has mostly worked out of base sets and first 2nd downs, and Bills lean on him allot when they attempt to push the running game.

 

Games were both are playing, Jackson has mostly run in 3rd down and passing formations are prevalent, so the defense isn't typically as stacked as when Lynch is in. When Jackson has started, they have done a very good job of taking advantage of his skills. The run allot more traps and Draws, which are his strengths, and hit the edges more. Not saying that cant be your every week offense, but it is a different style of running game with Lynch as compared to Jackson, and I think the defenses tend to spend more time working for the style running offense we play when Lynch is in since there is more film on that, than on style we run when Jackson is in. Its like when backup QB comes in, looks real good if in relief or only an occasional start, but if forced to take over, defense catch up to his style.

 

Still, really like what Jackson brings, and he could be a good starter in this league with appropriate offensive scheme, just prefer having a back like Lynch, because believe it opens up larger possible play book for running offense, and makes it harder for defenses to key on specific types of runs. I do understand why people like Jackson as starter though, he is fun to watch.

[rstencel]

Ok so I apparently over exagerate almost all. Its a 2/3 vote in favor of Jackson at this point. And based on the responses on this board it looks like many are in favor of him overall then Lynch. There is no clear cut way to say who is better or worse. My opinion is that Jackson is a better all around back, and a better receiver and only sacrifices a little bit of running power but makes up for it with elusiveness and quickness.

 

And to say that we have seen him and not Marshawn might be the worst argument you could make. We have seen them both for the past 2+ years. I have been calling for Jackson to start since last year and will be extremely happy when he tears it up and wins the job outright while Lynch is sidelined for another dumb thing he did off the field that is jeopardizing his football future.

 

I do not want to sound like a Lynch hater. I happen to like Lynch very much, and will continue to root for him on Sundays. I just dont understand everyone's love for him. The guy isnt all that great. Hes played in 15 games the past 2 years and has barely surpassed 1,000 and 1,100 yards rushing. You dont have to be great to rush for 63 yards a game. I know everyones response will be that Jackson only rushed for 57 yards on Monday. He also had 83 receiving which Lynch could only dream about. Jackson is a gamer, someone you have to game plan for. He can eat you up rushing or receiving. With Lynch all you need to do is stack the box and gang tackle him.

 

It happens to be my opinion. No one is right about this. The fact is that we are blessed to have both and we need them both. They each have their skills that the other cannot provide. Lynch is great in short yardage. Id still rather have Lynch running the ball if were inside the 5 yard line than Jackson.

 

My real question is why cant we get both of these guys out on the field at the same time more often?

 

Would be tough to get them both on unless ran a split back system, or split one of the out wide, as neither one is a good enough blocker to fill the FB roll I do not believe. Split back systems aren't used allot anymore in the pro game, so there may be some things could take advantage of there, sort of like Miami did with Wildcat, but not to that extreme. There is a reason its not used allot anymore, as isn't as good of a formation for passing game or inside running game, but does force defenses to defend edges and can hit quickly on edges. Backs tend to line up closer to the line, so doesn allot as much time to setup blocks. Also uses allot of pitches, which have more of a chance of miscues on hand-off.

 

Is a intriguing thought though, and wouldnt mind seeing it run out there now and then.

[billsfreak]

Hate to say it freak but you seem to be outnumbered on this one. The fact that you think his attitude is the best thing Jackson has over Lynch tells many people that you dont watch many games. He is a better receiver based on stats that I listed below for you and its obvious in games. And if you only base your opinion on one 20 yard screen pass and claim its crap then you should go back and watch the games that Jackson has played in the last few years. Almost everyone here agrees he is a better blocker, receiver, route runner, and hits his running assignments better than Lynch. What games are you watching? And you dont have to be a genius to know that hitting someone with your car, or smoking weed with a pistol in your possession isnt a smart thing to do.

 

Lynch had 47 rec. for 300 yrds and a 6.4 avg with a 42 long 1 TD

Jackson had 37 rec. for 317 yrds and a 8.6 avg with a 65 long and 0 TD's

 

If Jackson was the featured back he would easily blow Lynch's receptions out of the water. He already has more yards, higher average on both rushing and receiving. The only debate should be if Jackson can hold up to the weekly wear and tear of an NFL season.

Hey Girly Freak I didn't even say who I thought was the better of the two, I was disputing how this individual knew for a fact that he (Jackson) was in better shape, smarter, better receiver, etc., like he was a personal trainer, doctor, teacher, etc. of both of them-things that he in know way could know. Surprised that he didn't say he knew Jackson cooks a better lasagna too? Why do you put up stats that aren't even accurate, my memory of the games I watch as you so dumbly put it which included monday night's disaster, Jackson had a TD reception, your stats have him with "0" TDs. For your info, there hasn't been a game in over 10 years that I haven't seen, you probably can't say the same, and even if you can, you must not understand what you are watching. I never said anything was crap either, but I will now, your f*cking post was crap, why don't you read the post you are responding to before you empty your blowhole. The only thing accurate in your post is the opinion that Jackson might not hold up to the weekly wear and tear, as he is a finesse back compared to Lynch. Do your homework before you come to school little boy.

[thebandit27]

In response to the bolded Bandit, my conclusions didn't come from watching the Monday Night game...I think you know me better than that. Including preseason, we've watched Jackson play in probably 30 games for the Bills. That's enough to get to know a player.

 

If I looked up their career stats, I'd bet that Jackson also has a higher yards per carry and a higher yards per reception.

 

But that's not relevant either. My observations of their skills over the last two plus years make me think Jackson is a better running back.

 

Forgive me for mis-stating. While my response was indeed to your post, my statement about someone drawing such a conclusion based on Monday's game was more of a global statement rather than meaning that I felt you were doing so. You are correct that I know you better than that.

 

You are also correct about their yards-per-carry and yards-per-reception stats, Jackson's are better. I have to agree that it's not a great barometer, since in 2008 about 80 percent of backup running backs (including those that started 1 or more games due to injury to the starter, like D. Ward, T. Choice, C. Buckhalter, K. Faulk, D. Rhodes, etc.) have better stats in this department than the de facto starter. I'm not sure if that's because of the situations they're used in, the limited workload keeping them fresher, or something else altogether.

 

I do agree that there are definitely things that Jackson does better than Lynch, I just feel that Lynch is a better overall player. I believe--if given the type of blocking that the new o-line looks capable of (based solely off of Sunday night, which granted is a small sample space)--Lynch will put up better performances than Jackson this year.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I just feel that Lynch is a better overall player. I believe--if given the type of blocking that the new o-line looks capable of (based solely off of Sunday night, which granted is a small sample space)--Lynch will put up better performances than Jackson this year.

Yeah it will be nice to see Lynch back behind our young and improving offensive line. Even in spite of Bell's foibles, I'm pretty optimistic about this line and the new direction the offense is taking.

 

I think by about midseason we'll have a clearer view on this debate. Maybe as you suggest, Marshawn will just blow up when he gets back. That's something that we can all hope for.

[benderbender]

The thing I love about Lynch is that he never gives up on plays. Jackson seems to find holes better.

[Endzone Animal]

Hey Girly Freak I didn't even say who I thought was the better of the two, I was disputing how this individual knew for a fact that he was in better shape, smarter, better receiver, etc., like he was a personal trainer, doctor, teacher, etc. of both of them. Surprised that he didn't say he knew Jackson cooks a better lasagna too?

Looks like someone skipped their anger management class...

[billsfreak]

Looks like someone skipped their anger management class...

No just replying to someone who replied to a thread with name calling, so I apologize for dropping to his grade school level of maturity.

[Endzone Animal]

Ironically, it seems the Lynch supporters are more likely to be angry, have a bad attitude, act disrespectful to others, and come across as a bit stupid. Jackson supporters have generally been more calm, rational, articulate, and respectful. This is just a generalization, of course, because there are certainly exceptions to the trend, but it is an interesting observation.

[rstencel]

Looks like someone skipped their anger management class... quote]

 

kind of ironic that someone with the screen name of animal and with a turd as avatar is being the voice of reason

[NoName]

Lynch...and its not that close....understand this...of the games that we won last year, who was the most valuable player on offense....most of the games it was Lynch.....Freddie is a great change of pace back and great 3rd down back but Lynch is the better back...I would like to see the carry ratio around 65 35 for lynch......Lynch is capable of producing several 100 yard games....I just can't see Jackson putting up 100 yd games running the ball.....

 

btw, there is no way in hell Jackson hits the whole harder and faster than Lynch...that is absolute nonsense...Jackson is the more patient runner and has the better vision...but he isn't going to break many tackles for u

 

If I were rating running backs and Adrian Peterson was like a 97 (out of 100) I would give Lynch like an 88 and Jackson like an 82

[StupidNation]

Just what makes these things so obvious? One game? If one game made a career Timmy Smith would be in the Hall of Fame and be regarded up there with Walter Payton and Jim Brown.

 

This is the typical defense of Lynch. You keep pretending it was one game. Who has had the higher YPCatch and Carry? Who went into the Redskins game the first time as a starter and played so well? You see if it was one game you could be right. In fact the argument reduced to one game is so stupid I can't qualify it.

 

We've all watch Jackson for 3 seasons and all of us with eyes saw him following blockers better, dance less and go forward more. Lynch is a power runner with more stops for a loss or at the LOS than any Bills RB I've ever seen as a starter because he dances when he should go forward. He wants to be a home-run RB without the speed or vision to do so.

 

When Jackson is in the game and he runs out for a screen I feel Thurman-esque moments come back to me. When Lynch goes out wide for a screen I never feel that at all.

 

I've watched both of these guys for the last 3 years and I can't see the argument for Lynch other than power, but even then I'm not impressed as he dances and then tries to brute forward for a positive vs. a negative yardage play. Whenever Jackson has a negative play the only reason is because someone got into the backfield, and with Lynch he dances so damn much the D goes into the backfield.

 

I'll take Jackson.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Ironically, it seems the Lynch supporters are more likely to be angry, have a bad attitude, act disrespectful to others, and come across as a bit stupid. Jackson supporters have generally been more calm, rational, articulate, and respectful. This is just a generalization, of course, because there are certainly exceptions to the trend, but it is an interesting observation.

Interesting observation.

I just can't see Jackson putting up 100 yd games running the ball.....

 

btw, there is no way in hell Jackson hits the whole harder and faster than Lynch...that is absolute nonsense...Jackson is the more patient runner and has the better vision...but he isn't going to break many tackles for u

 

If I were rating running backs and Adrian Peterson was like a 97 (out of 100) I would give Lynch like an 88 and Jackson like an 82

May I be the first to remind you that Jackson had 136 yards rushing in his previous start...last December against the Patriots.

I've watched both of these guys for the last 3 years and I can't see the argument for Lynch other than power, but even then I'm not impressed as he dances and then tries to brute forward for a positive vs. a negative yardage play. Whenever Jackson has a negative play the only reason is because someone got into the backfield, and with Lynch he dances so damn much the D goes into the backfield.

I'll take Jackson.

I agree with the bolded above. Lynch is to efficient movement as Maxim Afinogenov and Gilles Hamel were. He seems either to not understand the blocking schemes or to not have the vision to make a decision.

 

Meanwhile, Jackson is ever the good soldier:

 

"I just want to win. My goal right now is to help the team get some wins while I'm at the running back position during Marshawn Lynch's three-game suspension. Get as many all-purpose yards as I can because I feel the more times I got the ball in my hand, the more plays I can make. I have an offence that's able to go out and make some plays and I just have to make sure there's no fall-off from Marshawn being there to when I'm out there."

[Long Island Phil]

Ah...they both stink.

[Mr. WEO]

Forgive me for mis-stating. While my response was indeed to your post, my statement about someone drawing such a conclusion based on Monday's game was more of a global statement rather than meaning that I felt you were doing so. You are correct that I know you better than that.

 

You are also correct about their yards-per-carry and yards-per-reception stats, Jackson's are better. I have to agree that it's not a great barometer, since in 2008 about 80 percent of backup running backs (including those that started 1 or more games due to injury to the starter, like D. Ward, T. Choice, C. Buckhalter, K. Faulk, D. Rhodes, etc.) have better stats in this department than the de facto starter. I'm not sure if that's because of the situations they're used in, the limited workload keeping them fresher, or something else altogether.

 

I do agree that there are definitely things that Jackson does better than Lynch, I just feel that Lynch is a better overall player. I believe--if given the type of blocking that the new o-line looks capable of (based solely off of Sunday night, which granted is a small sample space)--Lynch will put up better performances than Jackson this year.

Stone hands.

[billsfreak]

Ironically, it seems the Lynch supporters are more likely to be angry, have a bad attitude, act disrespectful to others, and come across as a bit stupid. Jackson supporters have generally been more calm, rational, articulate, and respectful. This is just a generalization, of course, because there are certainly exceptions to the trend, but it is an interesting observation.

mrags throws that theory out the window, he seems to be a Jackson supporter but is throwing around childish names and acting angry. As for me, I support both of them, they both wear a red helmet with the charging buffalo on them.

[judman]

How about.. I like both. Different styles of running.

 

I am glad we have both guys. 2x the preparation for opponents, more tape to watch, etc...

[thebandit27]

Stone hands.

 

While I appreciate the well-stated and clearly well-thought-out opinion, Lynch caught 47 passes in 2008, and it's worth noting that he had more catches than the following RBs:

 

Leon Washington

Chris Johnson

Frank Gore

Fred Jackson

Thomas Jones

Darren McFadden

Clinton Portis

 

Just for fun, he also had more catches than the following players:

 

Kellen Winslow

Visanthe Shiancoe

Mark Clayton

Tony Scheffler

Patrick Crayton

Donald Lee

Justin Gage

Chris Chambers

 

So, his hands can't exactly be that bad now, can they?

[mrags]

Hey Girly Freak I didn't even say who I thought was the better of the two, I was disputing how this individual knew for a fact that he (Jackson) was in better shape, smarter, better receiver, etc., like he was a personal trainer, doctor, teacher, etc. of both of them-things that he in know way could know. Surprised that he didn't say he knew Jackson cooks a better lasagna too? Why do you put up stats that aren't even accurate, my memory of the games I watch as you so dumbly put it which included monday night's disaster, Jackson had a TD reception, your stats have him with "0" TDs. For your info, there hasn't been a game in over 10 years that I haven't seen, you probably can't say the same, and even if you can, you must not understand what you are watching. I never said anything was crap either, but I will now, your f*cking post was crap, why don't you read the post you are responding to before you empty your blowhole. The only thing accurate in your post is the opinion that Jackson might not hold up to the weekly wear and tear, as he is a finesse back compared to Lynch. Do your homework before you come to school little boy.

 

Well, I wasnt going to start calling names but apparently you are so stupid you dont realize your own screen name. Billsfreak, you might want to write that down in case you forget it again . You are right, no way anyone would know the physical shape of Lynch vs Jackson besides their trainer/doctor/teacher. The stats I listed are accurate and correct per NFL.com, last I checked they were a pretty solid source for NFL statistics. I have seen every Bills game with the exception of 1 dating back to 1997 and I happened to be at the Monday Night distaster that you speak of. Speaking of my post, all I stated was my opinion. You apparently think its a fact that Lynch is better than Jackson which is completely impossible to provide factual evidence in any way shape or form to prove it. The stats that I cut and pasted from NFL.com show that Jackson has 10 less catches, more yards, and a higher average per reception while only starting 3 games last season and Lynch started 15. That is a fact. It is a fact that Lynch had the majority of carries, and snaps last year in the Bills offense but Jackson produced more yards after the catch. For your information, it was Lynch that had an 18 yrd TD reception in the 2nd quarter of the Browns game on Monday the 17th. Good job with your useless rant on who know more and who saw what. I did my homework before I posted, you didnt even bother to open the book.

 

Lets sum this all up one more time so you dont get anything confused in the future. I didnt call you a name, I was simply using your screen name as a nick name, Jackson had more yards per reception than Lynch, I have seen every game with the exception of 1 in the last 10+ years, I was at the game that you claim to have seen and know for fact that Jackson had a reception for a TD when it was really Lynch, NFL.com is a credible source of NFL statistics, you dont do your homework when posting, and you think your opinion is proven fact while everyone else's opinions are complete crap.

 

Thanks for playing. Have a great weekend.