Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44

Thread: Marshawn Lynch un-retiring

  1. #1

    Marshawn Lynch un-retiring

    Do you think the Packers would have any interest in him?

    Couple of things to consider...

    1. Rodgers and he were teammates at Cal. Natural connection?
    2. At 31, he has taken a year off so his body may not be physically beat up like some of the other RB FA
    3. Might we get him for cheaper?
    4. Seachickens take Feast Mode, we get Beast Mode
    5. Gives us instant experience and tough running between the tackles

    I didn't like it at first, but am warming up to the idea.

    Go easy on me

  2. #2
    Wolf Pack Rat HOFer Deputy Nutz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In Skin's basket
    Posts
    9,843
    There are other backs that are available that haven't retired.
    "She was one big girl. What a disaster. When the best part of the night at a seedy strip club is befriending an old man trying to lure college guys into his RV for a ride back to campus, you have to know that god might hate you."

    The Skinbasket

  3. #3
    And the Seahawks own his rights. He is trying to force a trade.

    Raiders reportedly interested.
    Nobody in car culture ever understands that “they don’t make em like they used to” is survivorship bias.

  4. #4
    I'm not super interested in a 31 year old back, but you could take a chance on a 1-2 year contract. If you're going to consider Lynch, you might as well take a gander at all the other geriatric running backs.

  5. #5
    Red Devil Rat HOFer gbgary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    juuust o/s dallas
    Posts
    12,451
    it's a raiders generated story to play for his hometown team and replace murry short term. sea would have to release/trade him. oak is making moves.

  6. #6
    Stout Rat HOFer Guiness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada, eh?
    Posts
    11,999
    Probably the only way/reason he'd come back would be to play for his hometown team, the Oakland-'lame duck'-Vegas Raiders. I doubt very much he'd be interested in playing for GB.

    Of course, trying to predict Lynch would be a fool's errand to be sure.
    --
    Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...

    "He was mocked in the third, but after the combine they'll mock him into the first, for sure." - Fritz

  7. #7
    I think he is only interested in playing for the Raiders. TT wouldn't do it anyway, hell he failed to get him when he could of from the Bills. That was yet another Ted epic failure.

  8. #8
    Moose Rat HOFer woodbuck27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    27,236
    TT would never deal with that Headcase.

    He is a perfect fit if Oakland and Seattle can work things out.
    * To download Jesus Loves Me ring tones, you'll need a cell phone mame
    * If God doesn't fish, play poker or pull for " the Packers ", exactly what does HE do with his buds?
    * Rather than love, money or fame - give me TRUTH: Henry D. Thoreau

  9. #9
    Anti Homer Rat HOFer Bretsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fort Atkinson, WI
    Posts
    25,302
    not happening in Green Bay unless Lynch takes near the bet minimum and the Seahawks trade him to us for past considerations
    Fart in the Wind

  10. #10
    CutlerquitRat HOFer
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Maplewood Minnesota
    Posts
    6,455
    Hell no...sooooo much no.
    Swede: My expertise in this area is extensive. The essential difference between a "battleship" and an "aircraft carrier" is that an aircraft carrier requires five direct hits to sink, but it takes only four direct hits to sink a battleship.

  11. #11
    Barbershop Rat HOFer Pugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    N. Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    7,762
    Quote Originally Posted by Rutnstrut View Post
    I think he is only interested in playing for the Raiders. TT wouldn't do it anyway, hell he failed to get him when he could of from the Bills. That was yet another Ted epic failure.
    How do you know it was Ted's fault Seattle got him instead of us?

  12. #12
    Senior Rat HOFer
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    8,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Rutnstrut View Post
    TT wouldn't do it anyway, hell he failed to get him when he could of from the Bills. That was yet another Ted epic failure.
    What happened in that year? You're still bitching about that in a year we won the Super Bowl??

    This is the complete disillusionment of the TT haters. Don't like TT so they complain about anything even when we win the Super Bowl.
    Sometimes life leaves a hundred dollar bill on your dresser, and you don't realize until later that it's because it f***** you.

  13. #13
    Seattle must have known about this before signing Lacy, and they chose Lacy over him. I don't want Seattle's sloppy seconds. I also prefer speed backs like Montgomery and the other Seattle sloppy second we got.
    What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?

  14. #14
    Red Devil Rat HOFer gbgary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    juuust o/s dallas
    Posts
    12,451
    Quote Originally Posted by texaspackerbacker View Post
    I don't want Seattle's sloppy seconds.
    please...you wouldn't take wilson if we didn't have Rodgers? come oooon.

  15. #15
    CutlerquitRat HOFer
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Maplewood Minnesota
    Posts
    6,455
    Quote Originally Posted by gbgary View Post
    please...you wouldn't take wilson if we didn't have Rodgers? come oooon.
    But we have Rodgers so your point is moot.
    Swede: My expertise in this area is extensive. The essential difference between a "battleship" and an "aircraft carrier" is that an aircraft carrier requires five direct hits to sink, but it takes only four direct hits to sink a battleship.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by ThunderDan View Post
    What happened in that year? You're still bitching about that in a year we won the Super Bowl??

    This is the complete disillusionment of the TT haters. Don't like TT so they complain about anything even when we win the Super Bowl.
    Ted could have had him for a 4th and a conditional pick the next year. He played 2 seasons for Seattle then re-signed for 4 more years with them. We missed the chance at having an all pro caliber running back for 2 seasons and possibly more. 2010 didn't occur in a vacuum.

  17. #17
    Senior Rat HOFer
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    8,918
    ^^^^^^^^

    I see, so we would have won 4 more Super Bowls if only we had Marshawn Lynch. And if we had gotten Randy Moss in 2007, we could have had 3 more.

    Two players...... 7 Super Bowls pissed away....
    Sometimes life leaves a hundred dollar bill on your dresser, and you don't realize until later that it's because it f***** you.

  18. #18
    Anti Homer Rat HOFer Bretsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fort Atkinson, WI
    Posts
    25,302
    Quote Originally Posted by ThunderDan View Post
    ^^^^^^^^

    I see, so we would have won 4 more Super Bowls if only we had Marshawn Lynch. And if we had gotten Randy Moss in 2007, we could have had 3 more.

    Two players...... 7 Super Bowls pissed away....

    I don't think he's saying that; what he's saying is if we had taken the gamble we could have had an all pro caliber RB for several years and there is a good chance it would have led to more success. One more would have been validation. Seattle has been willing to take several free agency and trade risks along the way and we have chosen not to.
    Fart in the Wind

  19. #19
    ^^^^^ no I'm saying it was an easy move to make that would have cost minimal draft value. Are you arguing not making that trade made us a better team? If not then what's your point exactly.

  20. #20
    Who was the third round pick that Lynch would have cost?

    Would Moss have kept Brett warm by blowing in his ear versus the Giants?

    These are the variables we need to solve for.
    Nobody in car culture ever understands that “they don’t make em like they used to” is survivorship bias.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •