Uncle Si
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2007
- Messages
- 20,596
- Reaction score
- 3
12thManHawkFan":vwlyr78t said:volsunghawk":vwlyr78t said:12thManHawkFan":vwlyr78t said:kearly":vwlyr78t said:As long as Lynch is under contract, I am okay with him being the RB version of Brett Favre. If he were a free agent it would be a bit trickier, but as things stand now, he could decide to play in August and he'd be ready to suit up right away since he's still under contract.
Regarding loyalty, Lynch is obviously a loyal person. He's just... different. His brain fires synapses in a way that is foreign to the rest of us. That may be cumbersome to the FO and annoying to fans, but that doesn't mean he's doing it to be an ass. He's just a different kind of person that goes through life in a different way than most of us.
Thanks for the reply Kearly, its nice to have some actual thoughtful discussion instead of just getting bashed and insulted for having an opposing opinion.
To be fair, yours isn't "an opposing opinion."
It's a thread that claims in its title that Lynch "isn't loyal to Seattle," questions his devotion to the team, downplays his importance to the run game, and suggests that he's got some kind of "problem" just because he's not publicly talking up the team to your liking or generating any news about a contract extension... all in an entire 11 days after the season ended.
It's one thing to raise valid questions about whether Lynch is going to return. It's another entirely to perform this sort of character assassination just because your nose is tweaked.
Character assasination? I said I think Lynch loves his football and his teammates, i said I love Lynch. Why is it downplaying his importance to believe the team can be successful without him?
My OPINION is he doesnt give a crap about Seattle or his fans here, and that opinion has at least been acknowledged by some, but most everyone seems to think it doesnt even matter.
I completely agree with a few that have said this wouldnt even be a thing if Lynch wasnt one of the most socially awkward figures in sports.
How is it a "thing" right now though? I think that is the most confusing aspect of your point. It's been 11 days since the Super Bowl and you are concerned that one of our players, regardless of who he is, has not responded publicly to his contract issues. Of which, by the way, do not need to be addressed at the moment. He is under contract.
Your point then digresses into his feelings towards the city or its fans, based entirely on his lack of addressing something that does not need to be addressed.
I am just confused by the route with which you drew your point from.