Marshawn Lynch un-retiring

[SavedByGrace]

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 ;-)

[Deputy Nutz]

There are other backs that are available that haven't retired.

[pbmax]

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

Raiders reportedly interested.

[Teamcheez1]

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.

[gbgary]

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.

[Guiness]

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.

[Rutnstrut]

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.

[woodbuck27]

TT would never deal with that Headcase.

He is a perfect fit if Oakland and Seattle can work things out.

[Bretsky]

not happening in Green Bay unless Lynch takes near the bet minimum and the Seahawks trade him to us for past considerations

[Tony Oday]

Hell no...sooooo much no.

[Pugger]

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?

[ThunderDan]

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.

[texaspackerbacker]

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.

[gbgary]

I don't want Seattle's sloppy seconds.

please...you wouldn't take wilson if we didn't have Rodgers? come oooon.

[Tony Oday]

please...you wouldn't take wilson if we didn't have Rodgers? come oooon.

But we have Rodgers so your point is moot.

[yetisnowman]

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.

[ThunderDan]

^^^^^^^^

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....:roll::roll::roll:

[Bretsky]

^^^^^^^^

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....:roll::roll::roll:


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.

[yetisnowman]

^^^^^ 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.

[pbmax]

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.

[Rutnstrut]

There is no reasoning with the TT nut huggers.

[pbmax]

There is no reasoning with the TT nut huggers.

Nor is there any reasoning with 20/20 hindsighters.

Same true for those who think FA is all Super Bowl winners and hits, and never recall the expensive busts.

[Bretsky]

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

.


ALEX GREEN

[pbmax]

ALEX GREEN

Irreplaceable!

[ThunderDan]

^^^^^ 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.

I don't know if we would have been better or not. All I know is we won the 2010 Super Bowl and went 15-1 the next season. Hard to argue Lynch would have changed anything.

I always was a balanced offense guy. But I think I have joined the throw the ball all over the field after the last 9 games of the season. Having a great running game is awesome but your taking the ball out of the best player in the NFL's hands.

[ThunderDan]

There is no reasoning with the TT nut huggers.

So you are mad we didn't get Lynch but won the Super Bowl? Who can't you reason with?

[yetisnowman]

Nor is there any reasoning with 20/20 hindsighters.

Same true for those who think FA is all Super Bowl winners and hits, and never recall the expensive busts.

It's not all hindsight, I know plenty of Packer fans who wanted Lynch at the time of the trade. Of course there are expensive busts. But most of us sensible FA advocates are not insisting we go after guys like Suh and Albert Haynesworth every year.
We have room and picks to at least be somewhat active involving a non draft day trade once a decade or a mid-level signing.
Our defense is a shining example of where draft and develop combined with virtually no FA acquisitions can end up if you miss on a few drafts in a row. And I don't give a shit about comp picks when TT hasn't shown a high acumen for drafting defensive playmakers

[Rutnstrut]

Nor is there any reasoning with 20/20 hindsighters.

Same true for those who think FA is all Super Bowl winners and hits, and never recall the expensive busts.

Except I was on the Lynch bandwagon when he was a member of the Bills. I was pissed then about tightwad Teddy not getting him, that's NOT hindsight.

[Vincenzo]

Hah-Hah, I've never met or known a TT nutbugger.
Besides. he was just visiting his old teammates.

[esoxx]

Hah-Hah, I've never met or known a TT nutbugger.
Besides. he was just visiting his old teammates.

What is a TT nutbugger? Please explain.

[pbmax]

It's not all hindsight, I know plenty of Packer fans who wanted Lynch at the time of the trade. Of course there are expensive busts. But most of us sensible FA advocates are not insisting we go after guys like Suh and Albert Haynesworth every year.
We have room and picks to at least be somewhat active involving a non draft day trade once a decade or a mid-level signing.
Our defense is a shining example of where draft and develop combined with virtually no FA acquisitions can end up if you miss on a few drafts in a row. And I don't give a shit about comp picks when TT hasn't shown a high acumen for drafting defensive playmakers

Bill Belichick spent the better part of a decade trying to rebuild his defense, after the back to back Super Bowls, with draft picks, trades and FAs. It still took him a decade. Signing more free agents isn't the answer. Signing the right ones would be, but the is very hard to predict (not quite as hard as the draft projection, but more expensive). Saying you are avoiding the worst and most expensive of the FA classes just begs the question: how do you separate them out beforehand?

Remaking a defense can take a lot of time. Especially when the offense is established with vets and expensive.

There is no doubt that Thompson has committed significant draft capital to fix the defense since 2010 and had at best mixed success. He only fixed it for maybe 2.5 years. The 2012, 2014 and 2015 defenses were average and held up their end of the bargain in the playoffs while at times also getting knocked around.

In 2012 McCarthy had not solved the 49ers Cover 2 man under but his defense finally figured out Kapernick until the last damn drive (thank you Bush). In 2014, five extraordinary plays plus too much conservatism on offense cost them the Seattle game which for 56 minutes was a punched ticket back in the Super Bowl. In 2015, the defense gave a valiant effort but the offense was punchless in a game that should have ended in regulation except for two amazing and low percentage plays (and a bad decision to bypass a 2 point attempt). Had it ended, they surrendered 20 points to the best offense in the League.

After spending that draft capital on defense, he should have more fixtures than Matthews, Daniels and Perry. Shields going down really hurt and the depth wasn't ready or healthy. This is when EVERYONE says sign a vet. But remember this: someone signed Micah Hyde as their vet, and he is going to allow a lot of first downs in the middle of the field. Would you count on him making starter money for your defense?

No.

Which is why the vastly more important questions about the Packers brain trust remain these:

1. After much progress against man defenses with Cook, does McCarthy alter the rest of the offense to beat it? Or does he rely entirely on Bennett?

2. After progress in including Rodgers' arm in the 4 minute offense, will McCarthy resist the urge to run-run-pass on 3rd and long when killing clock with 6 minutes left?

3. Why does the player personnel department continue to draft players who do not fit the defense that Capers plays?

4. Why does Capers have no functional backup plan when man to man underneath isn't working? Why is this team STUCK playing man to man all the time? Now to be fair, Capers scheme is complicated and they do run some combos (man on one side and zone on the other) but that stuff tends to be the leakiest feature. Why is this still happening?

[pbmax]

Except I was on the Lynch bandwagon when he was a member of the Bills. I was pissed then about tightwad Teddy not getting him, that's NOT hindsight.

OK. And a lot of people wanted Moss. This is good.

But when have you been wrong? See, that is the had part. If you were GM, I would have a list of your busts. But on a message board, I only have a list of your greatest hits.

[Bretsky]

OK. And a lot of people wanted Moss. This is good.

But when have you been wrong? See, that is the had part. If you were GM, I would have a list of your busts. But on a message board, I only have a list of your greatest hits.

You just need to pay better attention to him; you seem to remember all of my busts........lol

[Zool]

It's almost like you can't always get something just because you want it. Maybe I'm crazy?

[Vincenzo]

Never mind esoxx, meant nuthugger. Capiche?

[Pugger]

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.

Everyone keeps forgetting Seattle could offer the Bills a higher draft pick in this instance. Let's say Ted offers that 4th. If Seattle does the same the Bills are gonna make that trade with the 'Hawks because they could give Buffalo the higher pick. It isn't always because of "Tightwad Teddy". :roll:

[Zool]

Remember when the same people complaining today about Lynch wanted Steven Jackson no matter the cost?

[pbmax]

You just need to pay better attention to him; you seem to remember all of my busts........lol

Just the one's you talk about actually.

Except for Chad Jackson, that one came up on the board for comparison a LOT in their first three years because he and Jennings were so close in draft position and Hoody was the other GM involved. I think they would have gotten discussed whether you were involved or not.

And I think you know this, but for those who don't, its not a knock. Making a call about a draft pick preference even BEFORE teams start to leak rankings is putting yourself out there. Maybe not brave, but gutsy advocacy. I don't do it because I remember my horrible track record (Webster Slaughter, Leroy Hoard, Kevin Stemke to name just a few).

Many, not all, of the free agent advocates don't ever talk about the miss rate. That it might be worse than drafting and more expensive and the infrequent recall of the times it doesn't work.

However, Zool has an even better reason to be skeptical. Some of the players in question might not want to come to Green Bay to play for a variety of reasons.

[esoxx]

Never mind esoxx, meant nuthugger. Capiche?

Shoot, thought we had another new term in packer rat vernacular.

[Rutnstrut]

OK. And a lot of people wanted Moss. This is good.

But when have you been wrong? See, that is the had part. If you were GM, I would have a list of your busts. But on a message board, I only have a list of your greatest hits.

My wife seems to have a very detailed list of all my busts. I'd put a copy on here but according to her it there isn't enough memory in all the internet for all my screw ups.

[gbgary]

he's not coming to GB or anywhere else not called raiders...if he comes back at all. it's all about playing for his childhood team.

[Pugger]

Doesn't Seattle have to give him his release first?

[Bretsky]

Doesn't Seattle have to give him his release first?


Yes, they do, but I'm guess they will try to trade him first.

[Carolina_Packer]

It's almost like you can't always get something just because you want it. Maybe I'm crazy?

Yes, but if you try some times, you just might find...you get what you need.