Trade Lynch for a 2014 1st? Would you?

Stop.

Lynch is the kind if back that even when he's old and slow and had a back up role could still beast his way to 800 yards in clean up duty.

I want him as a hawk for life.

this is crazy talk :177692:

Seattle is signing people left and right for a super bowl run. Why trade away a top five back this season for the future, when the future is now?

We draft a RB, and all the sudden we are talking about trading our proven elite back for one future 1st rounder? Wow.

Heresy! BURN THE HERETIC!

Ahem. I'd think about it. Then I'd say no.

I'd trade Lynch for a marriage pact. From him. To me. (I love Lynch).

I'd rather eat my own vomit than trade Lynch.

NO

Only if we get Clowney

Trade Lynch?

:laugh:

:laugh: :laugh:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Oh, you were serious? Sorry. :rofl:

boarderline want this topic removed.
no trade for lynch.

No. Dump this thread

How many RB's were drafted in the 1st round this year ? Exactly.

There was a marked difference in our offense when Lynch was in there and when Turbin was in there. I love Turbin and I think he's going to be a GREAT back, but he doesn't have the fight and the beast in him that Lynch does. Lynch is just more effective, period.

Michaels hasn't even seen a down yet in the NFL. I'm reserving judgement on any rookie until they perform in a real NFL game.

FargoHawk":10s3uabb said:

This is stupid. What a dumb topic. Sorry, but it's true.

Click to expand...

...and who are you?

What would be "stupid" or "dumb" would be NOT trading Lynch if we were fortunate enough to be offered a first for him. Sorry, but it's true.

If I had the option of using crayons to ask this question, some posters may have had an easier time with the question. And maybe not.

seatt1eslew":1mp3bow9 said:

No. Dump this thread

Click to expand...

LMAO. Well, would you take 2 1sts for Lynch?

As I mentioned earlier, this is what I wanted to see...how many put player over team. Now you know who you are.

HawkWow":a1doc10d said:

seatt1eslew":a1doc10d said:

No. Dump this thread

Click to expand...

LMAO. Well, would you take 2 1sts for Lynch?

As I mentioned earlier, this is what I wanted to see...how many put player over team. Now you know who you are.

Click to expand...

The thing is, many of us aren't putting a player over our team, we're using logic. Lynch, as it stands, is easily a top-5 back, in a year that we're poised to make a run at the Super Bowl. Why would we trade a huge part of our offense away for a future pick, when THIS season is one of the best opportunities I've ever seen us have at a Super Bowl? It doesn't make sense.

Trying to bone yourself out of a Super Bowl this year for an (ARGUABLY) better chance at one next year just isn't logical.

HawkWow":1i3l5qln said:

seatt1eslew":1i3l5qln said:

No. Dump this thread

Click to expand...

LMAO. Well, would you take 2 1sts for Lynch?

As I mentioned earlier, this is what I wanted to see...how many put player over team. Now you know who you are.

Click to expand...

Except that the team is better when Lynch in on the field. We just signed him to a major deal. He re-paid the team with a pretty good 2012.

Sorry, still a bad idea to trade away proven talent-in his prime-for potential.

Next proposal.

Lynch is such a beast that it's the equivalent of having a 6 man OL. He's too much of a factor right now to consider such a thing.

sheesh...throw this thread out now please