Patriots Rumor Speculation: Rams RB Steven Jackson may be available - Can you say Wow!

[Dragda]

Taylors career through 8 years compares very favorable to Jackson's after 8 years. Jackson has also had more touches, and theoretically more wear and tear.

I'm bowing out of this debate because I am biased. I'm a huge Jackson fan.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm bowing out of this debate because I am biased. I'm a huge Jackson fan.

Bias doesn't matter. Taylor was an excellent back, and the numbers of each players first 8 years are very comparable. Calling Steven Jackson equal to Fred Taylor is not at all an insult to Jackson, in fact its a complement.

 

[brdmaverick]

Bullcrap. At this stage of his career, he is WAY more comparable to Corey Dillion than to Fred Taylor. He's 4 years younger than Taylor was when he arrived (and 1 year younger than Dillion). Not to mention that while Dillon and Taylor were fine backs, Jackson is better than each of them.

I don't think for a second it'll happen, but to compare Jackson to Taylor is silly.

Trust me, I think Steven Jackson is/was good, I just think you are underappreciating Taylor.

 

[Wolfpack]

Trust me, I think Steven Jackson is/was good, I just think you are underappreciating Taylor.

Wait a second. You wrote Taylor was "Good/serviceable in flashes, but not a game changer" and I'm the one under-appreciating him?

In their primes, Jackson is better than Taylor. Taylor came here when he was 33, Jackson would be 29. To say signing Jackson would be akin to signing Taylor is a poor analogy.

Not that I think it's going to happen.

 

[BradyFTW!]

This upcoming season might well be the last chance that Jackson will have for the rest of his life to make $7M in a single year. I don't know why anyone thinks he'd voluntarily agree to play for half of that.

Which makes the rest of this debate kinda moot, but for the record I agree with Andy's take. Odds are extremely high that his production is going to fall off a cliff in the next year or two. When that happens, I'd rather that some other team was stuck overpaying for him.

 

[Ring 6]

Bullcrap. At this stage of his career, he is WAY more comparable to Corey Dillion than to Fred Taylor. He's 4 years younger than Taylor was when he arrived (and 1 year younger than Dillion). Not to mention that while Dillon and Taylor were fine backs, Jackson is better than each of them.

I don't think for a second it'll happen, but to compare Jackson to Taylor is silly.

When we got Dillon he had 1 top level year left in him.
When we got Taylor he had none.

8 years into their careers, Jackson's numbers were similar to Taylor's, frankly its a toss up which were better, and they were not as good as Dillons.
Dillon's 8th years was his 1st year here, and 9th was the beginning of the end, after 2210 carries. Jackson has 2138.

I think go could argue these 3 in any order, but to say Jackson is obviously better than the other 2 is not supportable.

 

[DaBruinz]

Even if he's on the downward slope of his career I'd take a Steven Jackson wearing a blindfold with his shoes tied together over anything the Patriots currently have. The dude has more talent in one toe than Ridley, Vereen, and Woodhead combined.

Exaggerate much?

Jackson is a great back, but how can you say that when we've not seen Vereen or Ridley in a starting capacity yet?

 

[DaBruinz]

At this point in his career, Steven Jackson is just a big name. Even if we did acquire him, we would not be acquiring the "highlight reel" that we are envisioning in your head. If we did acquire him, I'm sure it would be similar to our Fred Taylor acquisition. Good/serviceable in flashes, but not a game changer.

Considering the O-line he had in front of him, I'm fairly certain that he'd be MORE than a "Fred Taylor" acquisition. He'd more likely be a Corey Dillon type of acquisition, except we'd probably get 2-3 1000+ yard seasons out of him..

 

[Ring 6]

Considering the O-line he had in front of him, I'm fairly certain that he'd be MORE than a "Fred Taylor" acquisition. He'd more likely be a Corey Dillon type of acquisition, except we'd probably get 2-3 1000+ yard seasons out of him..

He has as many seasons in him, and as many touches as Dillon AFTER his first year here, and Dillon never had another 1000 yard season.
That doesn't mean Jackson can't, but he is certainly closer to no more top level seasons in him than many.

 

[Wolfpack]

When we got Dillon he had 1 top level year left in him.
When we got Taylor he had none.

8 years into their careers, Jackson's numbers were similar to Taylor's, frankly its a toss up which were better, and they were not as good as Dillons.
Dillon's 8th years was his 1st year here, and 9th was the beginning of the end, after 2210 carries. Jackson has 2138.

I think go could argue these 3 in any order, but to say Jackson is obviously better than the other 2 is not supportable.

I didn't say Jackson is "obviously better than the other 2" now did I? I said in their primes I think Jackson is better but I could see reasonable minds disagreeing. However, what is obvious is that if Jackson came here now he would have a far better impact than Taylor did when he came here and that at this stage of his career Jackson is more comparable to NE's aquisition of Dillon than Taylor.

 

[Ring 6]

I didn't say Jackson is "obviously better than the other 2" now did I?

You said

Not to mention that while Dillon and Taylor were fine backs, Jackson is better than each of them.

Yeah, that is saying he is obviously better.

I said in their primes I think Jackson is better but I could see reasonable minds disagreeing.

Can you point me to where you said that, because the post I quoted said nothing close to that.

However, what is obvious is that if Jackson came here now he would have a far better impact than Taylor did when he came here and that at this stage of his career Jackson is more comparable to NE's aquisition of Dillon than Taylor.

No it really isn't obvious.
Dillon stayed healthy Taylor did not. That was the primary difference.
9th year RBs staying healthy is no certain, or obvious thing.

 

[Wolfpack]

You said



Yeah, that is saying he is obviously better.

Actually no it's not and I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. Saying "I think Jackson is better" is nowhere near the same as saying "Jackson is obviously better."

The fact that you have to put words in my mouth does nothing but demonstrate the bankrupcy of your contention.

No it really isn't obvious.
Dillon stayed healthy Taylor did not. That was the primary difference.
9th year RBs staying healthy is no certain, or obvious thing.

Gee thanks for the insight.

This is the NFL and nobody's health is guaranteed. But, setting salary concerns aside, if you think 33 year old Fred Taylor would be a better aquisition than 29 year old Steven Jackson, then I suggest you step away from here, actually learn a thing or two about the sport of football, then return to this forum.

 

[InRodWeRust]

He would be Corey Dillon 2.0. He would have one damn good season left in him and then he will hit the big dreaded 30 for running backs and then finish with two more ok to decent seasons. I'd be happy for the right price. 3-4 million a year would sit right with me because I think he would help the Pats finally finish with a Super Bowl.

 

[Ring 6]

Actually no it's not and I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. Saying "I think Jackson is better" is nowhere near the same as saying "Jackson is obviously better."

The fact that you have to put words in my mouth does nothing but demonstrate the bankrupcy of your contention.
Gee thanks for the insight.

You are seriously joking now right?
You made a definitive statement that Jackson is a better player than either of those guys, and you are crying because I used the word obviously in addressing what you said?
Are you saying now that it is very debatable that Jackson is better than Dillon and Taylor were? Because you original post appeared to state your opinion had no doubt to it.

This is the NFL and nobody's health is guaranteed. But, setting salary concerns aside, if you think 33 year old Fred Taylor would be a better aquisition than 29 year old Steven Jackson, then I suggest you step away from here, actually learn a thing or two about the sport of football, then return to this forum.

Nice strawman.
I think I should suggest you take a step away and take a remedial reading class. But, certainly please illustrate where I said Taylor would be a better acquisition that Jackson, or even anything in the universe of that.
You don't have to worry about my football knowledge, but I surely have to be concerned of your command of comprehending the English language after you invented this beauty.
What grade are you in, and why don't they teach reading comprehension in your school?

 

[Ring 6]

Actually no it's not and I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. Saying "I think Jackson is better" is nowhere near the same as saying "Jackson is obviously better."

The fact that you have to put words in my mouth does nothing but demonstrate the bankrupcy of your contention.
Gee thanks for the insight.

This is the NFL and nobody's health is guaranteed. But, setting salary concerns aside, if you think 33 year old Fred Taylor would be a better aquisition than 29 year old Steven Jackson, then I suggest you step away from here, actually learn a thing or two about the sport of football, then return to this forum.

By the way, you apparently cannot comprehend YOUR OWN WRITING either, as you did not say "I think" Jackson is better. You said Jackson IS better than each of them.
You will thank yourself for not putting words in your own mouth.

 

[Ring 6]

Gee thanks for the insight.

This is the NFL and nobody's health is guaranteed. But, setting salary concerns aside, if you think 33 year old Fred Taylor would be a better aquisition than 29 year old Steven Jackson, then I suggest you step away from here, actually learn a thing or two about the sport of football, then return to this forum.

Clearly you needed the insight,because your comment was

However, what is obvious is that if Jackson came here now he would have a far better impact than Taylor did when he came here and that at this stage of his career Jackson is more comparable to NE's aquisition of Dillon than Taylor.

Now you have changed your answer to health is not guaranteed, when health and wear and tear are EXACTLY the reasons why you have no clue whether Jackson would have the impact of a healthy Dillon or an injured Taylor.

 

[Seels]

I'll say it: Jackson is obviously better. He plays on a team that has been the worst in football his entire career, with olines that could contend for worst in decades. Think about this: despite his team totally 15 wins the last 5 seasons, he has averaged 1500 yards from scrimmage.

Even if you consider the running of all three equal (which I don't think it is, but Dillon and Taylor both had significantly better lines to run behind), Steven Jackson is one of the better receiving backs of all time. He's not Faulk Allen or LdT, but he's legitimately great.

I'll agree it's moot until we at least see what happens next Thursday, but I don't think keeping Trent Richardson and Steven Jackson is a viable thing (but, it's also pretty stupid to waste a top pick on Richardson given the holes on that team in the first place).

 

[Ring 6]

I'll say it: Jackson is obviously better. He plays on a team that has been the worst in football his entire career, with olines that could contend for worst in decades. Think about this: despite his team totally 15 wins the last 5 seasons, he has averaged 1500 yards from scrimmage.

Even if you consider the running of all three equal (which I don't think it is, but Dillon and Taylor both had significantly better lines to run behind), Steven Jackson is one of the better receiving backs of all time. He's not Faulk Allen or LdT, but he's legitimately great.

I'll agree it's moot until we at least see what happens next Thursday, but I don't think keeping Trent Richardson and Steven Jackson is a viable thing (but, it's also pretty stupid to waste a top pick on Richardson given the holes on that team in the first place).

First of all, many of the top producing RBs in NFL history have been on mostly bad football teams.
Secondly, are you really trying to say Corey Dillon was on good teams in Cincy?
The 3 players through their first 8 seasons have had remarkably similar careers.
Jackson catching 40-50 passes a year as an outlet does enhance his numbers but this isn't exactly an earth shattering skill.

Through 8 seasons, anyone objectively discussing these 3 RBs would have to admit there are reasonable arguments to put any of them 1, 2 or 3 among the group.

And, yes, this is a wild rumor, that even the person who started it said he doesn't expect there is any way it will happen.

 

[Wolfpack]

You are seriously joking now right?
You made a definitive statement that Jackson is a better player than either of those guys, and you are crying because I used the word obviously in addressing what you said?

Intelligent readers can discern a statement of fact from a statement of opinion. Now what was that you were saying about a remedial reading class? The one you're currently in obviously isn't getting the job done.

As per your usual routine, you're obviously hell bent obsessed with having the last word, so have at it, but please only respond once. You don't need to respond to this one post 3 separate times like you did above.

 

[Ring 6]

Intelligent readers can discern a statement of fact from a statement of opinion. Now what was that you were saying about a remedial reading class? The one you're currently in obviously isn't getting the job done.

As per your usual routine, you're obviously hell bent obsessed with having the last word, so have at it, but please only respond once. You don't need to respond to this one post 3 separate times like you did above.

Dude, its not my fault that you made a statement or statements that you decided to claim you never made and then back off of them. You even misrepresented your own words, QUOTING yourself as saying something you didn't say.

Its also not my fault that you decided to create strawmen and rephrase my position into something that you know as well as I do it was not.

If you can't discuss honeslty and have to play those kind of games, then I should have the last word.

I have no interest in having a stupid discusison because you change what you say, deny saying what you did, and pull childish tactics like 'don't put words in my mouth' or misspelling bankruptcy to insult the argument I made that you couldn't keep up with becuase you didn't even know what you said.

It was a civil discussion until you starting coping an attitude that you didn't say what you did.