PDA

View Full Version : Jauron on Rhodes release. What??



HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 10:47 AM
He wishes he had 5 RBs but he cut a veteran even though your starter is suspended. This was all about money so why not admit as much.



Speaking for the first time since final cuts were made on Saturday, Dick Jauron briefly commented on the release of Dominic Rhodes.

“There is no move that we made that was an easy move (Saturday), and that wasn’t an easy move,” said Jauron. ”But we believe in the guys we kept, obviously, and that’s why we kept them. Again, we’ll move forward from here. We wish Dominic the best. He’s a good player.”

When asked if he’s worried about his running back depth with just Fred Jackson and Xavier Omon, along with FB Corey McIntyre on the roster right now (Lynch on reserve/suspended) Jauron offered the following.

“I wish we had five. Wish we could take seven in (to a game) and 80 players, but we can’t,” he said. ”I like the guys we kept and we’re get them ready and we’ll go.”

patmoran2006
09-07-2009, 10:49 AM
While I"m not saying every move the Bills make is financially driven (Kelsay and Denney are expensive and could've easily been cut for that along), the Rhodes release was indeed much about money.

Goobylal
09-07-2009, 10:53 AM
Please stop with the "it was about money" tripe. Why not cut Kelsay then and keep Bryan? :rolleyes:

MikeInRoch
09-07-2009, 10:53 AM
I heard one report that suggested it might be about money, another that suggested that it might be an issue with chemistry (Rhodes not liking not being the #2 behind Lynch). Why is it automatically assumed to be the first one?

JD
09-07-2009, 10:55 AM
:rofl: This organization never gets old

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 10:58 AM
Please stop with the "it was about money" tripe. Why not cut Kelsay then and keep Bryan? :rolleyes:

Pretty simple here. Rhodes getting cut costs us nothing and saves us about 1-2 million dollars.

If we cut Kelsay we are still on the hook for his contract and we would still be paying for a replacement(although minimal) in addition.

So keeping Kelsay is about money as well. Why isn't Copeland on the team?

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:02 AM
Who gives a ****! Just root for the guys that are on the team plain and simple. Lets start talking about game #1

Oaf
09-07-2009, 11:04 AM
All that means is he sacrificed numbers there for numbers at a different position..

bigbub2352
09-07-2009, 11:07 AM
cheap cheap cheap
thanx for that fine insight skeletor

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:07 AM
Who gives a ****! Just root for the guys that are on the team plain and simple. Lets start talking about game #1

Living in Homersville will not make the reality of the situation go away.

I am as excited about this game as anyone here. I'm praying for a miracle. I live 8 months out of the year waiting for the NFL and my favorite time of year( Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas). I curtail my traveling to enjoy all of it.

But making stupid decisions to save money, which is why the roster still loks like crap is not going away because the first game of the season is upon us.

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:09 AM
All that means is he sacrificed numbers there for numbers at a different position..

Rhodes was our best RB in pre-season. Did Jauron say he got cut because he got outplayed by Omon and Jackson? Missed that part.

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:11 AM
Living in Homersville will not make the reality of the situation go away.

I am as excited about this game as anyone here. I'm praying for a miracle. I live 8 months out of the year waiting for the NFL and my favorite time of year( Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas). I curtail my traveling to enjoy all of it.

But making stupid decisions to save money, which is why the roster still loks like crap is not going away because the first game of the season is upon us.

First off Im not living in Homersville (I just dont look negative direction constantly, Anything can happen on anyday.)

I am the same way about the 8 months and favorite time of the year. Im sure money wasnt the only reason. I dont think he would of been ok being a #3 and not to mention Omon outplayed his ass in preseason. He looked like crap plain and simple. I rather see Omon get time.

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:13 AM
Rhodes was our best RB in pre-season. Did Jauron say he got cut because he got outplayed by Omon and Jackson? Missed that part.

Rhodes wasnt even close to the best in preseason sorry. Dont know what you were watching. Lynch and Jackson are hands down better and Omon out played him IMO. Matter of fact the little time McIntyre got he looked better also.

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:19 AM
I dont think he would of been ok being a #3 and not to mention Omon outplayed his ass in preseason. He looked like crap plain and simple. I rather see Omon get time.


You realize that Omon averaged 1.1 yards a cary against GB and Pittsburgh while Rhodes was 5.1? Didn't Rhodes play against the starters?

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:21 AM
Rhodes wasnt even close to the best in preseason sorry. Dont know what you were watching. Lynch and Jackson are hands down better and Omon out played him IMO. Matter of fact the little time McIntyre got he looked better also.

3rd and 1. Who would you want to have the ball? Rhodes, McIntyre or Omon?

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:26 AM
McIntyre the way he looked in limited action

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:27 AM
You realize that Omon averaged 1.1 yards a cary against GB and Pittsburgh while Rhodes was 5.1? Didn't Rhodes play against the starters?

Im looking at overall on Omon not just this preseason. Kid has looked decent and deserved to make the roster.

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:29 AM
No to burst anybody's bubble here but if you are asked if you are worried about the RB depth you are bringing into the game after you just made cuts the answer should be "no".

Jauron left that door open. Not me.

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:30 AM
You could look at his statements in a different way also. Hes basically saying he rather not cut anyone and have a roster of 80. Reread it.

trapezeus
09-07-2009, 11:32 AM
makes you wonder if the ralph summit yesterday was more like ralph saying, "i needed the numbers to look a certain way, i understand that handcuffs your ability to win, and i just want to say, "no matter what happens with our 1-15 season, you all still have your job."

HHURRICANE
09-07-2009, 11:47 AM
You need to understand that the way the team runs it's finances conflicts with winning games.

The team had the money this year to keep the o-line together and build behind it. They chose to catapult the players because of money, not their play. We needed an upgrade at Center, not a new LT and LG.

If Rhodes makes one 3rd and 1 to run out the clock than it's worth the money if you are trying to win games. If you are trying to have good net income than it's not.

Not rocket science people. Our cap is not in danger here.

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:51 AM
If we dont have anyone else to be able to get 1 yard we are in trouble.

SquishDaFish
09-07-2009, 11:52 AM
And Peters got himself out of here. And Im glad hes gone. I liked him till this past year dont get me wrong. But he is a POS for doing what he did. He wasnt worth that much at this point.

Ground Chuck
09-07-2009, 11:52 AM
Oman / Rhodes... doesn't really matter.

Jackson is our man for the first three games.

mybills
09-07-2009, 11:56 AM
Rhodes wasnt even close to the best in preseason sorry. Dont know what you were watching. Lynch and Jackson are hands down better and Omon out played him IMO. Matter of fact the little time McIntyre got he looked better also.
I don't think it was about money, I think it's that McIntyre can be utilized more. Be it a FB, or a RB, and some other things he brings to the field.

yordad
09-07-2009, 11:59 AM
I heard one report that suggested it might be about money, another that suggested that it might be an issue with chemistry (Rhodes not liking not being the #2 behind Lynch). Why is it automatically assumed to be the first one?The second one makes more sense. Afterall, the signed Rhodes to that contract with the intention of making him be the three. Why would they then cut him becasue he makes too much to be a three?

Typ0
09-07-2009, 04:06 PM
If we weren't willing to pay him the contract he wouldn't have been brought in to begin with. This was about something other than money.

TacklingDummy
09-07-2009, 04:08 PM
If we weren't willing to pay him the contract he wouldn't have been brought in to begin with. This was about something other than money.
Old and injury prone?

yordad
09-07-2009, 07:37 PM
Old and injury prone?Disappointed he didn't pass Jackson on the depth chart? They knew his age coming in, and he was/is healthy. They knew his contract coming in. He did nothing to lose the #3 job. Lynch is suspended. Jackson has troubles with one of his hands. Omon has like 2 regular season carries.

It is like Rhodes just pissed someone off. Maybe he and AVP didn't get along.

yordad
09-07-2009, 07:38 PM
I bet he was completely shocked by the news.