Arod endorses Lynch.."Bring him on"

[imscott72]

Rotoworld's view on Buffalo holding onto Lynch..

NFL Network's Jason La Canfora reports that the Bills are telling teams Marshawn Lynch "is not available."
Because he's such a key part of Chan Gailey's weekly game plans. Lynch had three carries in Week 1, and the Bills ran the ball 14 times combined as a team. Buffalo is missing out on a golden opportunity to secure a mid-round pick in exchange for a bit player. The whole operation is mind-boggling. Sep. 15 - 8:25 pm et
Source: NFL.com

[woodbuck27]

Well here 's the thing on 'a Buffalo Bills Board and

the Bills fans there, won't be happy if it's a reality:

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=288237&page=7

Its too good a deal and the kind TT will/should make? So it looks 'at least' very possible. We soon see after the next game Vs those same Bills.

GO PACK GO!

[Gunakor]

Sounds like Hawk is open to leaving..

The agent for Packers ILB AJ Hawk told the Green Bay Press-Gazette that his client would be open to a trade.
"If some team called and wanted him to play on all three downs, I think he’d be excited about that," said agent Mike McCartney. McCartney did say Hawk's "first priority is to be the best Packer he can," but Hawk didn't even play a non-special teams snap in the opener. The Bills did just lose ILB Paul Posluszny, and Green Bay needs a running back. Unfortunately, Hawk's massive base salaries make a straight-up trade for Marshawn Lynch impossible. Sep. 15 - 9:04 pm et
Source: Green Bay Press-Gazette

I would hope Thompson at least gives Jackson, Kuhn and Nance a look see before dealing our best run stuffing linebacker plus a draft pick for the #3 back on perhaps the worst football team in the NFL in 2010. Just my opinion, of course.

Then again, I wonder if the Bills would be interested in such a trade in the first place. Posluszny will be healthy again eventually, and I wonder where Hawk would fit in the Bills depth chart after Posluszny returns. Great depth, sure, but they'd be faced with the same questions we are faced with right now. Does Hawk's salary justify his role there any better than it would here? Are the Bills as well equipped to take on that salary as we are? I mean, after all, it's apparent they have a lot more work to do to build a contender than we do, so they have to watch their payroll a bit more closely.

[woodbuck27]

Sounds like Hawk is open to leaving..

The agent for Packers ILB AJ Hawk told the Green Bay Press-Gazette that his client would be open to a trade.
"If some team called and wanted him to play on all three downs, I think he’d be excited about that," said agent Mike McCartney. McCartney did say Hawk's "first priority is to be the best Packer he can," but Hawk didn't even play a non-special teams snap in the opener. The Bills did just lose ILB Paul Posluszny, and Green Bay needs a running back. Unfortunately, Hawk's massive base salaries make a straight-up trade for Marshawn Lynch impossible. Sep. 15 - 9:04 pm et
Source: Green Bay Press-Gazette

I would hope Thompson at least gives Jackson, Kuhn and Nance a look see before dealing our best run stuffing linebacker plus a draft pick for the #3 back on perhaps the worst football team in the NFL in 2010. Just my opinion, of course.

Then again, I wonder if the Bills would be interested in such a trade in the first place. Posluszny will be healthy again eventually, and I wonder where Hawk would fit in the Bills depth chart after Posluszny returns. Great depth, sure, but they'd be faced with the same questions we are faced with right now. Does Hawk's salary justify his role there any better than it would here? Are the Bills as well equipped to take on that salary as we are? I mean, after all, it's apparent they have a lot more work to do to build a contender than we do, so they have to watch their payroll a bit more closely.

Now there ! I agree with you. AJ Hawk to Buffalo straight up for Marshawn Lynch appears to be a real stretch. Funnier things have happened but can TT pull that one off? He never makes such a move unless he's darn sure he wins ' the deal '.

Will the Bills GM allow that? The Bills fans won't be happy. AJ Hawk would be a one year rental, unless he takes alot less salary for next season and all that. Worked out in advance of any actual trade deal.

My feeling on this is that it has to be (maybe) AJ Hawk and another player or draft pick to make a deal for a Bills RB. It's not necessarily Marshawn Lynch either, that's being offered to us, or even, who TT may desire.

GO PACKERS!

[imscott72]

Well here 's the thing on 'a Buffalo Bills Board and

the Bills fans there, won't be happy if it's a reality:

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=288237&page=7

Its too good a deal and the kind TT will/should make? So it looks 'at least' very possible. We soon see after the next game Vs those same Bills.

GO PACK GO!

Interesting read on those boards. I have to wonder if they have a deal in place, but are just waiting until after this week's game.

[Patler]

Hawk won't be a Packer next year unless he is willing to renegotiate a lower salary. His contract calls for $10 million in 2011. That being the case, trading him this year could make some sense.

That said, it would also leave the Packers a bit thin at LB. They kept only 8. It would likely move Desmond Bishop into the starting lineup in the base defense, for however few plays that might be each week. I'm not sure that would be a significant downgrade for those plays. If Hawk's role is going to be that limited, not having him is not that big of a loss.

But, Lynch would bring a lot of baggage. He-said, she-said allegations of sexual assault, hitting a drunk pedestrian and leaving the scene, marijuana usage, gun charges, and this from last December:

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article29267.ece

Neither player appears to have much of a future where they are at currently, nor possible with the other team if traded. It could end up being a one year deal for each team, with the Bills not paying Hawk next year and the Packers jettisoning Lynch if Grant comes back, Starks shows anything, etc. However, it could help each team this year, shoring up a weakness by trading a player not having much impact currently.

[Patler]

Hawk won't be a Packer next year unless he is willing to renegotiate a lower salary. His contract calls for $10 million in 2011. That being the case, trading him this year could make some sense.

That said, it would also leave the Packers a bit thin at LB. They kept only 8. It would likely move Desmond Bishop into the starting lineup in the base defense, for however few plays that might be each week. I'm not sure that would be a significant downgrade for those plays. If Hawk's role is going to be that limited, not having him is not that big of a loss.

But, Lynch would bring a lot of baggage. He-said, she-said allegations of sexual assault, hitting a drunk pedestrian and leaving the scene, marijuana usage, gun charges, and this from last December:

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article29267.ece

Neither player appears to have much of a future where they are at currently, nor possible with the other team if traded. It could end up being a one year deal for each team, with the Bills not paying Hawk next year and the Packers jettisoning Lynch if Grant comes back, Starks shows anything, etc. However, it could help each team this year, shoring up a weakness by trading a player not having much impact currently.

[woodbuck27]

Hawk won't be a Packer next year unless he is willing to renegotiate a lower salary. His contract calls for $10 million in 2011. That being the case, trading him this year could make some sense.

That said, it would also leave the Packers a bit thin at LB. They kept only 8. It would likely move Desmond Bishop into the starting lineup in the base defense, for however few plays that might be each week. I'm not sure that would be a significant downgrade for those plays. If Hawk's role is going to be that limited, not having him is not that big of a loss.

But, Lynch would bring a lot of baggage. He-said, she-said allegations of sexual assault, hitting a drunk pedestrian and leaving the scene, marijuana usage, gun charges, and this from last December:

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article29267.ece

Neither player appears to have much of a future where they are at currently, nor possible with the other team if traded. It could end up being a one year deal for each team, with the Bills not paying Hawk next year and the Packers jettisoning Lynch if Grant comes back, Starks shows anything, etc. However, it could help each team this year, shoring up a weakness by trading a player not having much impact currently.

Good analysis Patler.

As we know TT it doesn't appear to me that he's after Marshawn Lynch but if I'm correct this whole rumor seems to me to simply ' blow up '. If that's the case. Where will he trade AJ Hawk? Hawk certainly appears to be set for a move as we see things developing at this time.

Reading the Bills fan board last night **, it does appear as if AJ Hawk himself believes he's bound for Buffalo.

** http://boards.buffalobills.com/showt...=288237&page=7

This is wild stuff.

GO PACKERS!

[bobblehead]

People who are so hot for Lynch might want to ask themselves why he isn't good enough to start for Buffalo. I'll assume Arod was just giving some support to a fellow Cal grad.

Lynch may be a disappointment, but that's to take nothing away from Fred Jackson... pretty damn good player. If we were going to go after a RB from Buffalo, I'd prefer it be Fred Jackson.

I agree...was about to post the same thing when I reached the end of the thread. Truth of the matter is that a lot of guys can run in the NFL when the blocking is there. I think BJack will make all this talk of giving up decent picks go away.

[woodbuck27]

People who are so hot for Lynch might want to ask themselves why he isn't good enough to start for Buffalo. I'll assume Arod was just giving some support to a fellow Cal grad.

Lynch may be a disappointment, but that's to take nothing away from Fred Jackson... pretty damn good player. If we were going to go after a RB from Buffalo, I'd prefer it be Fred Jackson.

I agree...was about to post the same thing when I reached the end of the thread. Truth of the matter is that a lot of guys can run in the NFL when the blocking is there. I think BJack will make all this talk of giving up decent picks go away.

The way I see this is that no deal will be made before we play 'the Bills' on Sunday. It makes sense that TT and MM will want to see what they have already 'in house'. Having that as 'a given' makes this possible trade a moot point or just rumor.

The thing that is fascinating to me is that 'where there's smoke - usually there's fire', and AJ Hawk obviously wants to play full time. It appears that the Buffalo GM isn't going to be satisfied with a straight up deal for AJ Hawk and in return we get Marshawn Lynch.

So my guess is that given his age at 29 years the RB to come over fr. 'the Bills', for AJ Hawk, is more likely to be Fred Jackson. Given all the circumstance that involve AJ Hawk. Fred Jackson for AJ Hawk, straight up... looks more realistic.

GO PACKERS !

[Guiness]

Kuhn is a fullback. You guys need to get this fantasy of a white running back out of your system.

Mike Alstott!!!!

[Guiness]

But, Lynch would bring a lot of baggage. He-said, she-said allegations of sexual assault, hitting a drunk pedestrian and leaving the scene, marijuana usage, gun charges, and this from last December:

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article29267.ece

That's just weird, and potentially worrisome. Have to think it was some misguided pick-up attempt? He obviously doesn't need the $20, but put a few drinks in some guys and who knows?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hawk won't be a Packer next year unless he is willing to renegotiate a lower salary. His contract calls for $10 million in 2011. That being the case, trading him this year could make some sense.

That said, it would also leave the Packers a bit thin at LB. They kept only 8. It would likely move Desmond Bishop into the starting lineup in the base defense, for however few plays that might be each week. I'm not sure that would be a significant downgrade for those plays. If Hawk's role is going to be that limited, not having him is not that big of a loss.

But, Lynch would bring a lot of baggage. He-said, she-said allegations of sexual assault, hitting a drunk pedestrian and leaving the scene, marijuana usage, gun charges, and this from last December:

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article29267.ece

Neither player appears to have much of a future where they are at currently, nor possible with the other team if traded. It could end up being a one year deal for each team, with the Bills not paying Hawk next year and the Packers jettisoning Lynch if Grant comes back, Starks shows anything, etc. However, it could help each team this year, shoring up a weakness by trading a player not having much impact currently.

Good post. I think too many people (e.g. Hawk hater) fail to realize that the events of the first game were unique, and we'll play base a lot more in future games. There's no doubt that Hawk is good in base, and that he's better than what we have. We carried 4 DL into the Philadelphia game. Jenkins got injured early and when he came back, Harrell got injured. Thus, throughout the whole game basically we had 3 healthy DL. We went to the nickel, rotated the 3 healthy DL, and Hawk was the victim. Nothing has changed regarding his status with the team. Circumstances dictated that Hawk didn't get much playing time.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Hawk gets traded though. If the Packers think Bishop isn't a huge dropoff, they made trade that for an upgrade at another position. Plus, Hawk is likely gone after this year. I almost hope he gets traded and kicks ass elsewhere.

[SkinBasket]

3rd rounder and Hawk Lock it up

That would be one dumb trade.

As I've said before, Lynch hasn't shown he's any better than Jackson. About all he's got on Jackson is a bunch of people who think he's the player they thought he might be when he was drafted instead of the player he is.

Even given our situation, I still wouldn't give them more than a 5th and Bishop.

You serious Clark?

How hasn't Lynch shown he's better than Jackson? He's a Pro Bowler. What the hell?

Oh God he's a Pro Bowler!?! Well, that must add at least 4-5 points to his strength and 6 points to his charisma! The other team gives you your first 50 yards free when you're a Pro Bowler, right?

The guy is Brandon Jackson with more playing time. Watch them play. Compare the players, not the fanboy dreams and expectations or their Madden numbers. If anything Jackson's proven himself (you know, through that pesky thing called production) to be a better receiving back.

All this retarded nonsense about how Lynch is such a better runner, receiver, and man tunnel lover are hardly more than unsupported fanboy ramblings.

[Freak Out]

If we end up trading a guy like Hawk I hope it's for a good DB.

Lynch sounds like more trouble than he"s worth right now.

Fred Jackson is available as a free agent pick in Division 4.