C.Biscuit97 Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Ah, the 20/ 20 hindsight Lynch post again! If the Bills don't trade him and he gets a year long suspension, they are idiots for not getting rid of a ticking time bomb. (Even after his suspension, I have firsthand knowledge ML was doing some very illegal things). The guy has grown up. Good for him. But he averaged 4 ypc in Buffalo. He wasn't exactly a gamechanger here. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm And after the trade, he averaged 3.5 for Seattle. Both Freddy Jackson and CJ Spiller average more ypc. Lynch feeds off Russell Wilson, who maybe runs the read option the best in the NFL. He is a very good rb but to be crying about ML, who is still one strike away from a year long suspension, when you have 2 good backs is silly.
NoSaint Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 A hit and run plus a weapons possession charge is a couple of scrapes? As also pointed out he has a pending DWI case that he's put off now. I wouldn't exactly call that scrapes. He's has problems with the law. Saying all that, I hated to see him go. Agreed - his $20 bill thing, family getting pulled over all over town and the pit bulls at his apartment (or whatever that story was) are little scrapes. He had major incidents too and it seems being in the media black hole of Seattle has helped keep his DUI quiet. If the gun/drug incident counted as a first strike on the drug program his current DUI will be a suspension if convicted. If his reckless driving counted (don't think it did as drugs/alcohol weren't in the charges despite likely being in his system) it could've been a long suspension looming. Ah, the 20/ 20 hindsight Lynch post again! If the Bills don't trade him and he gets a year long suspension, they are idiots for not getting rid of a ticking time bomb. (Even after his suspension, I have firsthand knowledge ML was doing some very illegal things). The guy has grown up. Good for him. But he averaged 4 ypc in Buffalo. He wasn't exactly a gamechanger here. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LyncMa00.htm And after the trade, he averaged 3.5 for Seattle. Both Freddy Jackson and CJ Spiller average more ypc. Lynch feeds off Russell Wilson, who maybe runs the read option the best in the NFL. He is a very good rb but to be crying about ML, who is still one strike away from a year long suspension, when you have 2 good backs is silly. I'm not even sure he's actually turned the page off the field yet as much as avoided getting caught (other than the DUI at 4am in a mid 90s econoline van - seriously?!?)
RCOHEN13 Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Look on the bright side; we also gave them a draft pick for a QB that we never used. And now he's back there and played really well when he came in for Wilson in blowout and we would not have had the QB carousel if we have kept him and not wasted time on Kolb who was an injury waiting to happen. I thought it was a smart move to re-sign Jackson. Even if Kolb were healthy, he is a totally diff style of QB that EJ is. Jackson has the scrambling ability which obviously, this coaching staff values heavily with going with Thad and all the guys they brought in initially after EJ went down, White, Dixon who is now on P.S. and went with Thad over Tuel and all the above because of his scrambling ability. We would have had EJ as QB1 and Tuel as QB and probably would have came out of the Cleveland game with a win with Jackson over Tuel to finish that game. I liked what i saw from Thad last week , but we had the perfect backup QB RE-SIGNED in offseason and chose the WRONG guy in Kolb. Jackson easily would have been totally cool as a back-up and help rook along and has a similar skill set to EJ, Thad and would not have had to change O for him coming in. He had plenty of game experience in career and would not have look "star struck" by moment as Tuel did and cost us a game that the team fought extremely hard for on prime-time vs Browns and we never would have had this rediculous influx of signings and workouts for the slew of QB's in past 2 weeks.
NoSaint Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Remember the reports that he'd go into the bars on the Chippewa strip and order soft drinks because he brought his own booze? He had a ton of growing up to do when he was in Buffalo. It was a good thing to trade him. GO BILLS!!! And I think he/his family had gotten a pretty solid list of people that weren't happy with them in buffalo that would've helped make it hard to right the ship (or atleast not get caught) in buffalo. Another factor that I am happy about is keeping him an arms length from Stevie who was allegedly riding with him for the hit and run.
Homey D. Clown Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 I would take one Freddie Jackson over 2 Marshawn Lynches any day of the week. The guy has a good game every now and then and this place gets it's panties all bunched up. I don't think for one second that the trade was bad, they guy was a cancer for the team, didn't want to play here, and at the time 1 strike away from a season long suspension. Seattle can keep him, I like our guys infinitely better. Just listen to the way Spiller and Freddie carry themselves in the media, they are true professionals, while "least Mode" can barely conjugate a verb. In case anyone is interested in some real stats, Fred Jackson has a higher YPC average for his career. This trade was a no brainer, if the Bills had even a decent QB since the trade, We're talking about Freddie as a potential league MVP in one or 2 of those seasons. In this case, I see no reason to look in the rear view mirror on this guy, he's become a capable back for another team, so frickin what. We have 2 better ones instead.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 I would take one Freddie Jackson over 2 Marshawn Lynches any day of the week. The guy has a good game every now and then and this place gets it's panties all bunched up. I don't think for one second that the trade was bad, they guy was a cancer for the team, didn't want to play here, and at the time 1 strike away from a season long suspension. Seattle can keep him, I like our guys infinitely better. Just listen to the way Spiller and Freddie carry themselves in the media, they are true professionals, while "least Mode" can barely conjugate a verb. In case anyone is interested in some real stats, Fred Jackson has a higher YPC average for his career. This trade was a no brainer, if the Bills had even a decent QB since the trade, We're talking about Freddie as a potential league MVP in one or 2 of those seasons. In this case, I see no reason to look in the rear view mirror on this guy, he's become a capable back for another team, so frickin what. We have 2 better ones instead. I agree. At the time, Freddy (with a rookie spiller) over lynch was a no-brainer.
Webster Guy Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 The trade makes me so sick to this day I refuse to watch a Seattle game. I'm in the same boat. This was a case of a player dictating what THEY want, not the other way around. Lynch wasn't going to get into any more trouble, he was a 23 year old punk from an impoverished Oakland childhood who was just given millions of dollars. Guys like that are going to make mistakes, and he did his share of it for sure. Then he just wanted out and to get a fresh start like anyone would who screwed up and felt like the community hated him. Guys I know you hear this all the time from people claiming to have inside information on the Bills drafting etc., but I honestly had 100% accurate firsthand information on what happened the day we drafted Lynch, and it was Ralph insisting I WANT A RUNNING BACK that forced us to abandon the draft board and pick Marshawn. Joe Staley the Tackle from Michigan was highest on our board and Levy was pushing hard for him but Ralph intervened and we took a guy that ended up being a waste of a pick. All due respect to Hairston, who has had some decent games for us. Obviously Carder was a waste.
BobDVA Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Kudos pitchfork and torches crowd, may you always have someone to run out of town!
K-9 Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Kudos pitchfork and torches crowd, may you always have someone to run out of town! Spare me. Lynch ran himself out of town with his behavior. GO BILLS!!!
Wayne Cubed Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Lynch wasn't going to get into any more trouble, he was a 23 year old punk from an impoverished Oakland childhood who was just given millions of dollars. Guys like that are going to make mistakes, and he did his share of it for sure. Then he just wanted out and to get a fresh start like anyone would who screwed up and felt like the community hated him. He wasn't? I'm not sure if you follow Lynch or not, but he has a pending DWI, that his lawyer has been able to delay the trial, presumably because it will result in a suspension for him, if convicted. He still is getting in trouble.
wnysteel Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 As a franchise, for the last few years, we've greatly over-valued running backs. they are generally not worth where we drafted them. so really, getting anything for lynch was a bonus. when you factor in the character issues, it was a no-brainer.
Coach Tuesday Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Can't two points of view both be correct here? 1) NoSaint's point about his back issues bears repeating - the way he runs, his shelf life is about to expire. I guarantee he'll only last another year or two max, then it's over. And the Seahawks will still be paying him. BUT 2) It's hard to believe they couldn't have done better than a 4th and a 5th. They should've been able to get more compensation for him (although his off the field stuff made that difficult). The Saints reportedly had a better offer on the table. Nix was just a terrible, awful poker player.
thewildrabbit Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) That's nothing but revisionist history IMO. Lynch got into a couple scrapes, but, the truth of the matter is he was traded because Chanix wanted a shiny new toy. They didn't give a rats ass that the Bills were stacked at only one position at the time. They didn't care that they were switching defense. They chose a player in the first round of their first draft who plays a position they didn't have a need at. It was and it is a stupid, egotistical, arrogant pick. And before everyone jumps down my throat about Spiller...I like the guy, but it doesn't change the facts. Exactly Chan Gailey wanted his Water-bug, and stated such months before the draft that year. Just to show how inept Buddy Nix actually was, the New Orleans Saints were calling Buffalo about Lynch and were willing to give up a 3rd rounder. Nix never even took their call. Jay Glazer of FOX reports that the Saints had told the Bills that they were interested in trading for Lynch, a first-round pick in 2007. But the Bills didn’t shop Lynch, as Glazer had first reported back in October. Glazer now reports that the Saints would have given the Bills a third-round pick, more than the Seahawks ultimately surrendered. Even if for some reason the Bills didn’t want to trade Lynch to the Saints, the Bills should have at least shopped Lynch around. At a minimum, they could have gotten more out of the Seahawks. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/09/marshawn-lynch-could-have-been-a-saint/ It just drives me crazy about how bumbling-ly foolish Buddy Nix was to this franchise and not many really recognize it. The local Buffalo media basically crucified Bills HC Hank Bullough for his miss-speak, and stupid actions and yet give Nix a pass. Imagine if the Bills had hired Bill Cowher or even Marty Schottenheimer instead of Gailey. It is my opinion that the Bills would have never traded Lynch and he would be doing great things in Buffalo. Edited October 18, 2013 by FeartheLosing
clearwater cadet Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 It over now, the bills are heading in the right direction.
NoSaint Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) Can't two points of view both be correct here? 1) NoSaint's point about his back issues bears repeating - the way he runs, his shelf life is about to expire. I guarantee he'll only last another year or two max, then it's over. And the Seahawks will still be paying him. BUT 2) It's hard to believe they couldn't have done better than a 4th and a 5th. They should've been able to get more compensation for him (although his off the field stuff made that difficult). The Saints reportedly had a better offer on the table. Nix was just a terrible, awful poker player. i think both sides of that can definitely be true. he was a high risk trade which diminished his value (both injury and conduct, his career had question marks and a contract negotiation coming up as well), but that doesnt mean we got optimal value either. i think we were closer than most want to admit though given how well he played. it wasnt a gimme that he would. i dont think these threads would stop if we got a 3rd instead either. i doubt that nix passed a better offer, but someone may have lowballed an initial offer that they wouldve been willing to go higher on given another chance. teams also said they had no idea he was on the trade table and i think any one of us couldve easily and confidently known if we were a gm that it was worth calling if we were interested. i think that he couldve probably fetched more, but i dont think that it wouldve been drastically more. a 3rd from a team that was missing pierre thomas, reggie bush, and was down to signing julius jones off the street to start seems possible to me, but i doubt we flat passed on it unless we expected it to be a LATE 3 vs an EARLY 4 and 5 (remember, the saints were playing well and on their way to the playoffs while the hawks barely snuck in and upset them) Exactly Chan Gailey wanted his Water-bug, and stated such months before the draft that year. Just to show how inept Buddy Nix actually was, the New Orleans Saints were calling Buffalo about Lynch and were willing to give up a 3rd rounder. Nix never even took their call. Jay Glazer of FOX reports that the Saints had told the Bills that they were interested in trading for Lynch, a first-round pick in 2007. But the Bills didn’t shop Lynch, as Glazer had first reported back in October. Glazer now reports that the Saints would have given the Bills a third-round pick, more than the Seahawks ultimately surrendered. Even if for some reason the Bills didn’t want to trade Lynch to the Saints, the Bills should have at least shopped Lynch around. At a minimum, they could have gotten more out of the Seahawks. It just drives me crazy about how bumbling-ly foolish Buddy Nix was to this franchise and not many really recognize it. The local Buffalo media basically crucified Bills HC Hank Bullough for his miss-speak, and stupid actions and yet give Nix a pass. Imagine if the Bills had hired Bill Cowher or even Marty Schottenheimer instead of Gailey. It is my opinion that the Bills would have never traded Lynch and he would be doing great things in Buffalo. so that glazer reported he was being shopped then reported that he wasnt within that quote doesnt make you question it at all? the saints got A LOT of questions about why they didnt pull the trigger. its possible the front office decided to float out "we tried" at the expense of buddys reputation. Edited October 18, 2013 by NoSaint
CodeMonkey Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 He was also one more screwup from being suspended for a significant period of time. Doing stupid stuff was becoming a regular thing with him at the time. It is easy to only remember part of the story. It was a good trade at the time, given the chances he would be suspended were pretty high. bull ****. It was a stupid trade at the time as well as now. The Bills FO only seemed to want boy scouts at the time and it bit them in the ass. The bolded above is simply ridiculous and sounds like it came from a Bills press release.
Doc Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 The Bills got the best they could for him. He was lazy and dumb off the field and one incident away from a long suspension (which he'll likely get beginning next year as his trial for his 7/2012 DUI is set for this December, although it will probably get pushed into the off-season ). I was a fan until I heard him talk about how he grew up and started taking his job seriously only after leaving the Bills.
ChanOverChin Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 It was Lynch for two fourth round picks in consecutive years. It's trades like this that t put the Bills where they are today. Lynch is one of the top 3-5 RBs in the entire league.......yes, ahead of both Spiller and Jackson. Seattle has risen to one of the top three teams in the league in large part becuae of the Lynch acquisition.
boyst Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Rivisionists also point out that if we kept Lynch we would have never had a chance to see all that Fred Jackson had to offer. Which I think is hilarious. CJ Spiller is 1 year younger then Lynch and it is not like Lynch could not have been a more featured back by this point as Jackson began to see limited time. I'd rather be seeing Lynch getting the reps that Spiller is because Lynch is a more versatile back that has more then 1 tool in his bag. That's nothing but revisionist history IMO. Lynch got into a couple scrapes, but, the truth of the matter is he was traded because Chanix wanted a shiny new toy. They didn't give a rats ass that the Bills were stacked at only one position at the time. They didn't care that they were switching defense. They chose a player in the first round of their first draft who plays a position they didn't have a need at. It was and it is a stupid, egotistical, arrogant pick. And before everyone jumps down my throat about Spiller...I like the guy, but it doesn't change the facts. Well said. We had no reason to ditch Lynch. Look at how many teams out there keep players of his level and just wade out the rough spots.
Recommended Posts