_ROOKIE_ Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 If they traded Lynch for Boldin, then they could let Jackson start. The Bills would have the WR they needed and the Cards would have RB they need.
thurman34 Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 If they traded Lynch for Boldin, then they could let Jackson start. The Bills would have the WR they needed and the Cards would have RB they need. great, then we would have two of the top ten paid wide recievers in the league..yeah, not happening
bills_red Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 I rather have Lynch who won't need a new huge deal
jwws9999 Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 I rather have Lynch who won't need a new huge deal why do you care how much bolton would be paid
bills_red Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 why do you care how much bolton would be paid 1. Don't want to have 2 WR that make a sh-- load of cash 2. Have no RB behind the starter. 3. Lynch has little trade value right now imo since the run in(s) with law. 4. Cards will not trade him since they brought Warner back.
300yrds Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 then we can bring in TO and we would never have to run the ball...and we would see what kind of qb trent is...having the most elite wr core ever essembled. this is clearly never going to happen...not realistic
Recommended Posts