Please explain this to me....

[Earthquake Enyart]

The consensus would be happy with drafting Lynch in the first. Lynch is unproven in the NFL and a woman beater which goes against the things that Marv stands for.

However, the consensus is against trading the 1st round pick for Turner, who in very limited duty, looks like a real NFL back.

Why is it ok to draft Lynch, but not ok to trade the 1st for Turner?

[Mr. Miyagi]

Before you get too far with that, the charges for assault on Lynch's ex-grilfriend were dropped because of lack of evidence and that it was a extortion scam.

As far as we know Lynch has NO character issue.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Where there's smoke, there's a woman with her face punched in.

[OpIv37]

Where there's smoke, there's a woman with her face punched in.

there are two sides to every story- she probably deserved it.

[justasportsfan]

and a woman beater Maybe they want a rb with a mean streak . :huh:

[jamesiscool]

there are two sides to every story- she probably deserved it.

:rofl:

you know yura buffalo fan when.....

[justasportsfan]

Where there's smoke, there's a woman with her face punched in.
let's get rid of Whitner.

[OpIv37]

I look at it this way: Our two biggest needs are LB and RB. If we get one of them with the first pick, whether it's by using the pick or via a trade, mission accomplished: we used our best pick to fill our biggest need.

That being said, I think there will be quality at RB in the 2nd or 3rd so I'd rather see our first rounder turned into an LB, but I won't be mad if we get an RB out of it.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Where there's smoke, there's a woman with her face punched in.
So any accusation equals conviction nowadays? You'd fit in well in North Korea.

[jamesiscool]

I look at it this way: Our two biggest needs are LB and RB. If we get one of them with the first pick, whether it's by using the pick or via a trade, mission accomplished: we used our best pick to fill our biggest need.

That being said, I think there will be quality at RB in the 2nd or 3rd so I'd rather see our first rounder turned into an LB, but I won't be mad if we get an RB out of it.

i agree with you 100%. I feel that we can get a dominant player in the first by drafting willis BUT if we get lynch im not guna be pissed whatsoever.

[Mr. Miyagi]

With that said, I don't mind Turner coming here but I don't want to pay too much for him.

[Earthquake Enyart]

All I'm saying is that he's not Frank Reich.

Forget that stuff. I just don't get how it's ok to draft the unproven Lynch in the first round, but horribly wrong to trade the 1st for Turner, who at least has played in the NFL.

[camelcowboy]

Where there's smoke, there's a woman with her face punched in.Nothing say i love you like a punch in the face

Cops and witness claimed she was full of crap. She's a gold digger she ain't messing with no broke naggers

[jamesiscool]

All I'm saying is that he's not Frank Reich.

Forget that stuff. I just don't get how it's ok to draft the unproven Lynch in the first round, but horribly wrong to trade the 1st for Turner, who at least has played in the NFL.

Fair market value.

willis, 2 3rd's and a seventh.

thomas jones, swapping of 2nd rounders.

why pay more than we have to, these guys were starters and have rushed for over 1000 yards. why pay more than anyone else has for a backup.

he's a great young RB with alot of upside but why throw away draft picks.

[ddaryl]

Turner is a great option at RB for us partially based upon the perception that he frees up our #12 pick and allows us to fill other holes. The other reason is he is probably on equal rating with the top RB's in the draft wit experience.

however no team will have ot spend a 1st rd pick to get Turner IMO, so why even consider it when it isn't necessary.

[camelcowboy]

All I'm saying is that he's not Frank Reich.

Forget that stuff. I just don't get how it's ok to draft the unproven Lynch in the first round, but horribly wrong to trade the 1st for Turner, who at least has played in the NFL.

Yeah, Everyone keeps saying that Turner has never carried a full load in the NFL. At least he's played in the league, he's been in some big games. No rookie is going to be able to carry the load either. Peterson couldn't stay healthy in college, and Lynch split carries every year he was in school. Turner was also as productive as any of these guys in college. I wouldn't lose sleep over giving first rounder value for him. I just don't think they should give up anymore then that we do need as many picks as possible. I would love to see the swap of picks with turner. Maybe a conditional pick next year with a pick this.

[Earthquake Enyart]

So Lynch is better than Turner? Is that what you guys are saying?

[jamesiscool]

So Lynch is better than Turner? Is that what you guys are saying?

no. giving up a first is more than anyone has given up for a RB this offseason.

[Tatonka]

So Lynch is better than Turner? Is that what you guys are saying?

i think so, yes.

i think turner turns out to be every bit of larry johnson.

and no, im not kidding.

[The King]

Willis is the focus if you ask me. If Willis is not an option I can deal with trading the 12th for Turner.

[Patrick76777]

The consensus would be happy with drafting Lynch in the first. Lynch is unproven in the NFL and a woman beater which goes against the things that Marv stands for.

However, the consensus is against trading the 1st round pick for Turner, who in very limited duty, looks like a real NFL back.

Why is it ok to draft Lynch, but not ok to trade the 1st for Turner?


Football fans tend to WAY over value draft picks for some reason.

Ask them if they'd trade 12 overall over Lance Briggs and many would say no way. But they'd be totally willing to take a complete flyer on Patrick Willis.

Same thing with Turner vs. Lynch.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take certain positions in the first round. Never take a CB in the first, never take a RB in the first, never take a TE in the first.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take a player at 12 because the mocks have him slotted at 16. So if our biggest need was RB, but the next best RB wasn't slotted for at least 4 more picks, they'd demand that we trade down to get better value instead of just taking the guy we need.


This whole draft thing has taken on a life of it's own. And dudes love to over value the picks.

[Tatonka]

would you give up a 1st round pick for larry johnson? i would.

[camelcowboy]

Fair market value.

willis, 2 3rd's and a seventh.

thomas jones, swapping of 2nd rounders.

why pay more than we have to, these guys were starters and have rushed for over 1000 yards. why pay more than anyone else has for a backup.

he's a great young RB with alot of upside but why throw away draft picks.

Willis a pos who runs for 990 yards gets 2 3rd rounders and a 7th. Thomas Jones who runs for 1300 yard two years in a row gets what is equal to a 3rd round pick, but wes welker who has pretty much the same resume as turner gets a 2nd and 7th. The difference is these players with young side aren't being thrown out the door like willis and jones. They were going to be gone either way. Your going to have pry turner away from san diego which will cost more, if the bills thinks he's worth it then i won't complain. But your not going to get turner for a 3rd, or two 3rds the chargers see value in keep him thats market value.

[Jan Reimers]

The consensus would be happy with drafting Lynch in the first. Lynch is unproven in the NFL and a woman beater which goes against the things that Marv stands for.

However, the consensus is against trading the 1st round pick for Turner, who in very limited duty, looks like a real NFL back.

Why is it ok to draft Lynch, but not ok to trade the 1st for Turner?
You may be right, EE. Putting aside character issues, Turner has proven to be a very good backup running back in the NFL, while Lynch has proven absolutely nothing on the professional level.

My concern is giving up too much for Turner. He may or may not be the feature RB that we need - many guys are better backups than starters - so I just can't see giving up our 12th overall pick for him. Before we do that, I'd rather see us go LB in the first round, and RB in the 2nd or 3rd.

[patmoran2006]

The only reason I wouldnt trade my first now is because Patrick Willis might be on the board, whom I think is more valuable than Lynch or Turner...

But if Willis is gone, and RB would be our best value at the 12th pick, Id have no problem trading the pick for Turner.

I think Marv has to take a chance that Willis is on the board and thats why you dont trade the 12th pick now; even if the chance is not good.

[Earthquake Enyart]

Football fans tend to WAY over value draft picks for some reason.

Ask them if they'd trade 12 overall over Lance Briggs and many would say no way. But they'd be totally willing to take a complete flyer on Patrick Willis.

Same thing with Turner vs. Lynch.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take certain positions in the first round. Never take a CB in the first, never take a RB in the first, never take a TE in the first.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take a player at 12 because the mocks have him slotted at 16. So if our biggest need was RB, but the next best RB wasn't slotted for at least 4 more picks, they'd demand that we trade down to get better value instead of just taking the guy we need.


This whole draft thing has taken on a life of it's own. And dudes love to over value the picks.
You and thurm are the only reasons I even try to talk footbal here.

This is my point. If we are so sold on Turner being the next Larry Johnson, then giving up a 1st for him is no big deal.

I don't care what we got for Willis. He's a POS.

[HHURRICANE]

there are two sides to every story- she probably deserved it.

I like any RB that can "hit the hole"!

:couch:

[Tatonka]

i am telling you.. turner and larry johnson are the same style running back.

alot of people would ***** if we gave up a 1st, but in the end, everyone would be so damn happy that we FINALLY got a stud at running back.

[jamesiscool]

Willis a pos who runs for 990 yards gets 2 3rd rounders and a 7th. Thomas Jones who runs for 1300 yard two years in a row gets what is equal to a 3rd round pick, but wes welker who has pretty much the same resume as turner gets a 2nd and 7th. The difference is these players with young side aren't being thrown out the door like willis and jones. They were going to be gone either way. Your going to have pry turner away from san diego which will cost more, if the bills thinks he's worth it then i won't complain. But your not going to get turner for a 3rd, or two 3rds the chargers see value in keep him thats market value.

im not saying willis was a savior and a class act. what i am saying is that these trades set the bar for STARTING RB's in this league. and that bar was set low so why give up our best hand this early into the game?

[Patrick76777]

You and thurm are the only reasons I even try to talk footbal here.

This is my point. If we are so sold on Turner being the next Larry Johnson, then giving up a 1st for him is no big deal.

I don't care what we got for Willis. He's a POS.



After all the dust has settled, You still get a player for that pick.


I think most of these guys wouldn't do it, because it would make the draft boring.

[Earthquake Enyart]

i am telling you.. turner and larry johnson are the same style running back.

alot of people would ***** if we gave up a 1st, but in the end, everyone would be so damn happy that we FINALLY got a stud at running back.
That's my point.

But they better be right.

[camelcowboy]

Put it this way

For a first round pick

:check:Turner VS Leon Hall - in a heart beat
:check:Turner VS Pos - a player i dislike even more then hall
Turner VS Lynch = I can make arguements for both
Turner VS Peterson:check: i can make arguements for both but in the end peterson wins
Turner VS Wills:check:based on need he's the better value, starting to think he'll be gone by 12 anyway

[HHURRICANE]

The only reason I wouldnt trade my first now is because Patrick Willis might be on the board, whom I think is more valuable than Lynch or Turner...

But if Willis is gone, and RB would be our best value at the 12th pick, Id have no problem trading the pick for Turner.

I think Marv has to take a chance that Willis is on the board and thats why you dont trade the 12th pick now; even if the chance is not good.

Pat all 1,380 "overreactive" posts have been forgiven for this great one!!!!

I think we need to hang in there for Willis. Turner is worth a second and a third only. Our first should not even be a consideration at this point.

[gr8slayer]

Turner = McGahee

Lynch = Faulk

I want a guy who is a threat any time he touches the ball, I want a guy who can freaking catch the ball.

[Earthquake Enyart]

I would rather give up a first for Turner than draft Lynch.

[gr8slayer]

The only reason I wouldnt trade my first now is because Patrick Willis might be on the board, whom I think is more valuable than Lynch or Turner...

But if Willis is gone, and RB would be our best value at the 12th pick, Id have no problem trading the pick for Turner.

I think Marv has to take a chance that Willis is on the board and thats why you dont trade the 12th pick now; even if the chance is not good.
Pat before he ran a 4.3 forty you probably didn't even know his name (maybe you did but the average football fan didn't.)

[Mr. Pink]

How about this for a question.

If Turner was in college last year and put together a season of 157 carries for 941 yards in a major conference would you draft him 12th overall?

Seeing those are his career numbers in 3 seasons at SD. It's not like the guys old, he's all of 25, with little wear and tear. He can and should be productive for at least 6 years.

[gr8slayer]

I would rather give up a first for Turner than draft Lynch.
Just depends on what type of running style you're looking for.

[camelcowboy]

im not saying willis was a savior and a class act. what i am saying is that these trades set the bar for STARTING RB's in this league. and that bar was set low so why give up our best hand this early into the game?

The bills didn't want mcgahee, and the bears didn't want jones the market value for a player every team knows you want gone a 3rd round pick. The bills were lucky to get that for willis. The arguement is well they're starters well both teams didn't want them, so if they draft a running back in the first round even though they never startered a game in the NFL hows is that not overpaying by the market value arguement. You pin your arguement on the fact that turner is a back up. Well on alot of teams who don't have LT im under the opinion he could be a damn good starting RB. Just because he's stuck behind the best player in the league shouldn't deminish his value.

[Patrick76777]

I would rather give up a first for Turner than draft Lynch.


I just took my first close look at Turners stats and although he didn't get a ton of carries, when he did, he ran like a mother F-er.

A few big runs in there.


Why not, go get the guy.

Run and stop the run. If your a football team in Buffalo, Cleveland or Pittsburgh that's all you should do. All the time.

With our new line, Turner and A-Train, we wouldn't lose past Novemeber!

Run and stop the run!

[camelcowboy]

Pat all 1,380 "overreactive" posts have been forgiven for this great one!!!!

I think we need to hang in there for Willis. Turner is worth a second and a third only. Our first should not even be a consideration at this point.

hang in all you want he'll be gone.

[Ickybaluky]

i am telling you.. turner and larry johnson are the same style running back.

Both are big and run hard, but I think their styles are different.

LJ is a more patient runner, waiting for his blocking before taking off. Turner is very quick to the line and uses his acceleration, size and speed to run away or through guys. Turner is far less likely to ad-lib. Once they break into the secondary, they are similar in that they will out run or run over most defenders. Neither guy is a very accomplished receiver.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Turner = McGahee

Lynch = Faulk

I want a guy who is a threat any time he touches the ball, I want a guy who can freaking catch the ball.
Whoa. :eek:

[justasportsfan]

Pat all 1,380 "overreactive" posts have been forgiven for this great one!!!!

I think we need to hang in there for Willis. Turner is worth a second and a third only. Our first should not even be a consideration at this point.Eh. But if we miss using that 1st on Willis, people will be blasting MArv for that next year saying, "we could've had Turner if we didn't risk it ,yadayadayada"

[Mr. Miyagi]

We don't know what Turner can do in full time duty, nor what Lynch can do as a pro. So that argument based on potential is endless.

Assuming they are equal in running abilities. Who's the better blocker? Who's the better receiver? Who's more versatile and can do more for us?

Those are the questions.

[camelcowboy]

We don't know what Turner can do in full time duty, nor what Lynch can do as a pro. So that argument based on potential is endless.

Assuming they are equal in running abilities. Who's the better blocker? Who's the better receiver? Who's more versatile and can do more for us?

Those are the questions.

I'll have to go with the guy that has performed well in the NFL despite the limited action. He has big play speed, and Power i'd take turner.

[gr8slayer]

We don't know what Turner can do in full time duty, nor what Lynch can do as a pro. So that argument based on potential is endless.

Assuming they are equal in running abilities. Who's the better blocker? Who's the better receiver? Who's more versatile and can do more for us?

Those are the questions.
Versatility = Lynch

Better receiver = Lynch

Better blocker = Really couldn't tell you, haven't seen enough of Turner but I can tell you that Lynch is better than McGahee.

[jamesiscool]

The bills didn't want mcgahee, and the bears didn't want jones the market value for a player every team knows you want gone a 3rd round pick. The bills were lucky to get that for willis. The arguement is well they're starters well both teams didn't want them, so if they draft a running back in the first round even though they never startered a game in the NFL hows is that not overpaying by the market value arguement. You pin your arguement on the fact that turner is a back up. Well on alot of teams who don't have LT im under the opinion he could be a damn good starting RB. Just because he's stuck behind the best player in the league shouldn't deminish his value.

I'm not trying to argue, just playing the devils advocate. if we get turner i will be ECSTATIC. if we spend a first rounder on him so be it. it would be ncie to see us get him for less but if the price doesnt come down and marv gives it up for him so be it.

what im trying to say is, I'm not going to get my hopes up if we do not get him. if we land hime, AWESOME, if not i'm over it.

[camelcowboy]

Versatility = Lynch

Better receiver = Lynch

Better blocker = Really couldn't tell you, haven't seen enough of Turner but I can tell you that Lynch is better than McGahee.

Turner has shown he can catch out of the back field, and he's returned kicks so his hands can't be all that bad, and that does give him some help with versatility.

Power=Turner
Speed=Turner
Experience=Turner
Nick name=turner the burner pretty sweet.

[gr8slayer]

Turner has shown he can catch out of the back field, and he's returned kicks so his hands can't be all that bad, and that does give him some help with versatility.

Power=Turner
Speed=Turner
Experience=Turner
Nick name=turner the burner pretty sweet.
Speed part you are dead wrong, the others I can't disagree.

[camelcowboy]

I'm not trying to argue, just playing the devils advocate. if we get turner i will be ECSTATIC. if we spend a first rounder on him so be it. it would be ncie to see us get him for less but if the price doesnt come down and marv gives it up for him so be it.

what im trying to say is, I'm not going to get my hopes up if we do not get him. if we land hime, AWESOME, if not i'm over it.

I like the debate, i like turner too

[DraftBoy]

Id rather have Turner to be honest, there are no character questions (yes I know Lynch's charges were dropped, but if you think thats out of peoples minds then your nuts), he has done well in the NFL, and we dont have to deal with an adjustment period. Plus Lynch is more of a dancer, and Id prefer a guy who is a north south style of runner. Turner has a rare blend of size and speed that doesnt come along often. He also learned from the best and can use that to his advantage.

[DraftBoy]

Speed part you are dead wrong, the others I can't disagree.

Turner ran a 4.3 40, lynch was over 4.4 in speed Turner beats him

[camelcowboy]

Speed part you are dead wrong, the others I can't disagree.

Really i read turner had 4.4 speed, i read lynch had 4.5 speed. Straight line stats can be decieving i know, but turner has shown he can break big runs off on the pro level.

[gr8slayer]

Turner ran a 4.3 40, lynch was over 4.4 in speed Turner beats him
Speed is not just strait line, it's quickness too. Lynch is a juking machine, Turner is a run over you RB.

In reality we aren't going to draft Lynch anyway because he is "too ghetto" for the organization, but it would be the smartest thing we have ever done if we did.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Turner has shown he can catch out of the back field, and he's returned kicks so his hands can't be all that bad, and that does give him some help with versatility.

Power=Turner
Speed=Turner
Experience=Turner
Nick name=turner the burner pretty sweet.
The last thing I want to do is to grab a guy based on his nickname.

PacMan is a cool name too. :down:

[DraftBoy]

Speed is not just strait line, it's quickness too. Lynch is a juking machine, Turner is a run over you RB.

In reality we aren't going to draft Lynch anyway because he is "too ghetto" for the organization, but it would be the smartest thing we have ever done if we did.

Speed is just straight line, your talking about quickness and agility. Ill give you Lynch has the edge in quickness and agility, but Turner will beat him in a timed dash, he's just faster.

[gr8slayer]

Speed is just straight line, your talking about quickness and agility. Ill give you Lynch has the edge in quickness and agility, but Turner will beat him in a timed dash, he's just faster.
FOOTBALL SPEED, I could give a rats ass about how fast you can run a forty. I want to see FOOTBALL SPEED. Lynch has football speed, there have been plenty of people who have run great forties and done not a damn thin in the NFL.

[OpIv37]

This whole draft thing has taken on a life of it's own. And dudes love to over value the picks.

I think there's some homerism involved in that. Right now, our hopes for 2007 depend on filling some MAJOR holes with draft picks, so people here talk themselves into certain picks being the answer.

When George Allen coached the Skins and the Raiders, he would routinely trade away entire drafts for more proven players who could come in and have an immediate impact. Now, with the salary cap and FA, the NFL has changed and that strategy can't be employed if you hope to win long-term, but the logic of a draft pick or two for a proven player still holds up.

PS One of George Allen's assistants on those teams was the first full-time ST coach in NFL history. His name was Marv Levy.

[camelcowboy]

The last thing I want to do is to grab a guy based on his nickname.

PacMan is a cool name too. :down:

Turner doesn't have arrest record, not that i know of anyway. So if you don't get arrested nicknames are cool. :up:

[Devin]

The consensus would be happy with drafting Lynch in the first. Lynch is unproven in the NFL and a woman beater which goes against the things that Marv stands for.

However, the consensus is against trading the 1st round pick for Turner, who in very limited duty, looks like a real NFL back.

Why is it ok to draft Lynch, but not ok to trade the 1st for Turner?

:bf1:

[DraftBoy]

FOOTBALL SPEED, I could give a rats ass about how fast you can run a forty. I want to see FOOTBALL SPEED. Lynch has football speed, there have been plenty of people who have run great forties and done not a damn thin in the NFL.


And its obvious Turner has NFL FOOTBALL SPEED based on his long runs, Lynch can outjuke him, but Im not sure he can outrun him. We can go back and forth all day long on this but your not going to convince me of anything different.

[DraftBoy]

Football fans tend to WAY over value draft picks for some reason.

Ask them if they'd trade 12 overall over Lance Briggs and many would say no way. But they'd be totally willing to take a complete flyer on Patrick Willis.

Same thing with Turner vs. Lynch.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take certain positions in the first round. Never take a CB in the first, never take a RB in the first, never take a TE in the first.

Then there are the guys who refuse to take a player at 12 because the mocks have him slotted at 16. So if our biggest need was RB, but the next best RB wasn't slotted for at least 4 more picks, they'd demand that we trade down to get better value instead of just taking the guy we need.


This whole draft thing has taken on a life of it's own. And dudes love to over value the picks.

The game has changed, and the ways of winning have changed along with it. To win in the NFL you have to use your draft picks wisely and no recent team has not done so and been successful. Thats why you see the over valueing of draft picks sometimes.

[gr8slayer]

And its obvious Turner has NFL FOOTBALL SPEED based on his long runs, Lynch can outjuke him, but Im not sure he can outrun him. We can go back and forth all day long on this but your not going to convince me of anything different.
Ditto

Lynch > Turner

[DraftBoy]

Ditto

Lynch > Turner

Better Pro= Turner

and Id bet on that

[gr8slayer]

Better Pro= Turner

and Id bet on that
I like bets. Name your bet.

[Mr. Miyagi]

I like bets. Name your bet.
:movie:

[Mr. Miyagi]

Avatar bet!!!!!!!

[gr8slayer]

Avatar bet!!!!!!!
Silence yourself!

[Devin]

Personally I agree with Patricks point but not how its used, I dont want briggs because imo hes the product of his environment.

Turner is a starter on most any team apart the one hes on. Anyone who says he isnt fast hasnt seen him play. Hes basically a fullback with 4.4 speed. And hes done the past two seasons what mcGahee never did here, break off runs of 70+. He has big play ability.

Ill take someone who is a pro now over someone who dissappears in big games anyday.

Turner > Lynch.

This argument can be debated all day long, ultimatley if we gave up a 2nd and a 3rd for Turner id be ok with it. Maybe even a 3rd this year and a 1st next year.....MAYBE. As far as Briggs goes, I like the guy I just dont like him at a cost of #12 and the 15-20 mil guaranteed hes looking for.

And to be quite honest im one of the few who is happy with Ellison, the idea of having a Crowell-Willis-Ellison LB group imo is solid.

[gr8slayer]

Personally I agree with Patricks point but not how its used, I dont want briggs because imo hes the product of his environment.

Turner is a starter on most any team apart the one hes on. Anyone who says he isnt fast hasnt seen him play. Hes basically a fullback with 4.4 speed.

This argument can be debated all day long, ultimatley if we gave up a 2nd and a 3rd for Turner id be ok with it. Maybe even a 3rd this year and a 1st next year.....MAYBE. As far as Briggs goes, I like the guy I just dont like him at a cost of #12 and the 15-20 mil guaranteed hes looking for.

And to be quite honest im one of the few who is happy with Ellison, the idea of having a Crowell-Willis-Ellison LB group imo is solid.
I agree with that.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Personally I agree with Patricks point but not how its used, I dont want briggs because imo hes the product of his environment.

Turner is a starter on most any team apart the one hes on. Anyone who says he isnt fast hasnt seen him play. Hes basically a fullback with 4.4 speed. And hes done the past two seasons what mcGahee never did here, break off runs of 70+. He has big play ability.

Ill take someone who is a pro now over someone who dissappears in big games anyday.

Turner > Lynch.

This argument can be debated all day long, ultimatley if we gave up a 2nd and a 3rd for Turner id be ok with it. Maybe even a 3rd this year and a 1st next year.....MAYBE. As far as Briggs goes, I like the guy I just dont like him at a cost of #12 and the 15-20 mil guaranteed hes looking for.

And to be quite honest im one of the few who is happy with Ellison, the idea of having a Crowell-Willis-Ellison LB group imo is solid.
:bf1:

I also like Turner enough and a 2nd and 3rd for him won't bother me.

[jamesiscool]

I like bets. Name your bet.

lf lynch is a better pro u have to change yur name to drew bledsoe...... GO!

[gr8slayer]

lf lynch is a better pro u have to change yur name to drew bledsoe...... GO!
That would be like changing your name to jamesisgay. No freaking way.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Define "better pro" first.

Whoever makes the Pro Bowl first? Or based on stats?

[gr8slayer]

Define "better pro" first.

Whoever makes the Pro Bowl first? Or based on stats?
I think Lynch will score more TD's every year. I think he will have more total yards and average more big plays than Turner.

[OpIv37]

And to be quite honest im one of the few who is happy with Ellison, the idea of having a Crowell-Willis-Ellison LB group imo is solid.

that's a fine idea but it assumes:
a) that Willis is still on the board when we pick
b) Marv actually picks him and
c) Willis isn't a bust.

Is that really any less of a risk than Briggs? The only real advantage I see is that it saves us some cap space (again, assuming we can actually GET Willis, which IMO isn't a safe assumption).

[camelcowboy]

Give it 2-3 years divide it into three catigories

Average rushing yard, Average TD, Average receiving yards, yards 2 out of 3 wins.

[jamesiscool]

That would be like changing your name to jamesisgay. No freaking way.

hey at least its not tom brady...:oops:

[Devin]

that's a fine idea but it assumes:
a) that Willis is still on the board when we pick
b) Marv actually picks him and
c) Willis isn't a bust.

Is that really any less of a risk than Briggs? The only real advantage I see is that it saves us some cap space (again, assuming we can actually GET Willis, which IMO isn't a safe assumption).

Of course it assumes a lot.

As it would with any rookie, however in this particular scenario.......and I dont feel this way often.....id rather take that chance. Willis is not only cheaper but is a great fit at MLB. I like Crowell on the strong side and I think Ellison is going to become a fine weakside guy.

Of course I maybe wrong, in the draft there is no sure fire pick. Id just rather take that chance. TO me taking that chance at 12 is less crippling then sending the pick away and taking on a monsterous salary for a guy who is certainly a decent LB but as big a question mark as a rookie as to how he will fit on this team.

Worst case if Willis is gone we trade down and attempt to fill more holes.

I dont mean to sound "matter-of-factly" about it because I do know its a big hole. I am just not the sold on Briggs for what he will cost.

[OpIv37]

Of course it assumes a lot.

As it would with any rookie, however in this particular scenario.......and I dont feel this way often.....id rather take that chance. Willis is not only cheaper but is a great fit at MLB. I like Crowell on the strong side and I think Ellison is going to become a fine weakside guy.

Of course I maybe wrong, in the draft there is no sure fire pick. Id just rather take that chance. TO me taking that chance at 12 is less crippling then sending the pick away and taking on a monsterous salary for a guy who is certainly a decent LB but as big a question mark as a rookie as to how he will fit on this team.

Worst case if Willis is gone we trade down and attempt to fill more holes.

I dont mean to sound "matter-of-factly" about it because I do know its a big hole. I am just not the sold on Briggs for what he will cost.

The whole LB thing has me really concerned.

With RB, there's still the possibility of the Turner trade (although it seems less likely every day), there are vets like Brown and Dillon we could still pick up (although I don't really like that option, I do feel it will get decent production out of the position for this season), and there are guys in the 2nd or 3rd round who could rotate with A-train. Basically, at this point it still seems like there are options for getting production out of the RB position in 2007.

When it comes to LB, I feel like we're pretty much screwed. We either shell out for Briggs or hope Willis falls to us, and neither of those are a) definite or b) really good options.

*sigh....

[Tatonka]

hey op.. dont kid yourself into thinking that willis is the only stud linebacker in this draft.

look were ellison came from last year.. look at the DROY.. Ryans was picked in the 2nd round.

there are alot of good line backers and this is a very linebacker friendly system.. so we will find someone.. for sure.

[OpIv37]

hey op.. dont kid yourself into thinking that willis is the only stud linebacker in this draft.

look were ellison came from last year.. look at the DROY.. Ryans was picked in the 2nd round.

there are alot of good line backers and this is a very linebacker friendly system.. so we will find someone.. for sure.

I hope you're right.

I have little doubt that even if Willis is gone, we'll find someone on the first day who can be a productive LB for us. My concern is that whoever we find will be ready to step in and play well on opening day of 2007.

[camelcowboy]

I hope you're right.

I have little doubt that even if Willis is gone, we'll find someone on the first day who can be a productive LB for us. My concern is that whoever we find will be ready to step in and play well on opening day of 2007.

I really believe willis is going to be gone before 12. I think 2nd round pick will be a linebacker.

[jamesiscool]

I hope you're right.

I have little doubt that even if Willis is gone, we'll find someone on the first day who can be a productive LB for us. My concern is that whoever we find will be ready to step in and play well on opening day of 2007.

we won't need to cuz we got COY WIRE BABY! WOOOO!!!!!!!!!

............................ please get willis.

[OpIv37]

we won't need to cuz we got COY WIRE BABY! WOOOO!!!!!!!!!


I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

If Coy Wire sees the field at LB for more than a handful of garbage-time plays, it means the 2007 season is officially training camp for 2008.

[jamesiscool]

yea but wouldnt it be cool to see a LB wearing 27!!

...........but seriously he did OK at mop up duty, he's depth at more than one position and a stellar special teams player, thats it.

[casdhf]

He was a LB in college, I think.

[jamesiscool]

He was a LB in college, I think.

yes he was. but that doesn't mean much now. randel el was a QB in college, so was brad smith. josh reed was a RB in college.

[OpIv37]

He was a LB in college, I think.

yeah but in the nfl he's the classic "tweener"- a little too small for LB, a little too slow for SS.

[jdbillsfan]

I really believe willis is going to be gone before 12. I think 2nd round pick will be a linebacker.

Don't be surprised if he is there at 12 and the Bills don't pick him. He was initially viewed as mid to late first rounder after the combine.

I am not sure if running at 4.38 as opposed to 4.51 at the combine is going to move him from the 20-25 range to 5-11 or 12 range.

If he is there at 12, Buffalo might feel he is a MLB and already feel set at MLB and draft a player like Beason.

[Michael82]

Willis is the focus if you ask me. If Willis is not an option I can deal with trading the 12th for Turner.
Me too. If I knew that Willis wouldn't be there at 12, I would give the pick away to SD for Turner. :up:

[Michael82]

Lynch's personality reminds me of McGahee. No Thanks! :ill:


I'd take Turner over him anyday! Now if Peterson was there, it's a different story. He's going to be a damn good RB.

[Tatonka]

josh reed was a RB in college.

your right!!

F michael turner and marshawn lynch!!

we have our new starting running back on the roster already :up:

[Tatonka]

Don't be surprised if he is there at 12 and the Bills don't pick him. He was initially viewed as mid to late first rounder after the combine.

I am not sure if running at 4.38 as opposed to 4.51 at the combine is going to move him from the 20-25 range to 5-11 or 12 range.

If he is there at 12, Buffalo might feel he is a MLB and already feel set at MLB and draft a player like Beason.

willis has been considered the top line backer in the draft all along.

i never saw anything that said willis was viewed as a LATE first rounder.

by the nature of the position, linebackers normally dont go in the top ten.. TKO was a beast in college and went at 16 to cincy.

[Devin]

willis has been considered the top line backer in the draft all along.

i never saw anything that said willis was viewed as a LATE first rounder.

by the nature of the position, linebackers normally dont go in the top ten.. TKO was a beast in college and went at 16 to cincy.

To some degree hes right Willis was intially projected as a mid/late 1st rounder.

While I dont put much stock into anything Kiper says he recently had Willis dropping into the 20's.

I honestly believe if we dont draft Willis it wont be because he wasnt available.

[Night Train]

I agree with EE.

If you like him enough off film, you're going to work the best deal possible to aquire him. I realize what similar deals with RB's have been done but each deal is unique to itself. You're not going to believe the other team will give him up for a 3rd unless you want to hear the phone hang up.

If this was 2008, we wouldn't be having this conversation, with all the top RB's coming out. This year is rather thin and suspect rookies don't impress the pro's who study film, no matter how great the scouting report looks. So Turner becomes more attractive and receives a higher return in trade value than most years.

Plus with a signed Vet , he can move here within a week and get in the program. Most Day 1 rookies attend 1 mini camp and leave until they sign a contract at the beginning of August. That's if they don't hold out. Already months behind, with zero NFL experience.

The Poker game continues but the prize (Turner) is pretty important to a team like us who desperately needs a front line RB. We'll find out soon enough how much the Bills like him.

[Michael82]

I agree with EE.

If you like him enough off film, you're going to work the best deal possible to aquire him. I realize what similar deals with RB's have been done but each deal is unique to itself. You're not going to believe the other team will give him up for a 3rd unless you want to hear the phone hang up.

If this was 2008, we wouldn't be having this conversation, with all the top RB's coming out. This year is rather thin and suspect rookies don't impress the pro's who study film, no matter how great the scouting report looks. So Turner becomes more attractive and receives a higher return in trade value than most years.

Plus with a signed Vet , he can move here within a week and get in the program. Most Day 1 rookies attend 1 mini camp and leave until they sign a contract at the beginning of August. That's if they don't hold out. Already months behind, with zero NFL experience.

The Poker game continues but the prize (Turner) is pretty important to a team like us who desperately needs a front line RB. We'll find out soon enough how much the Bills like him.
Great post! :bf1: