Captain Caveman

http://deadspin.com/5016256/marshawn-lynch...ing-things-real

What do I preach? And regardless of whether he was drunk, a hit and run is a serious offense and is not "understandable", at least not by me. And it certainly is suspicious considering the rumors that are heard about Marshawn throughout Buffalo, and considering it was 3:30 in the morning.

Marshawn was driving drunk. I'm better than you.

Goodell specifically states that he was waiting for Marshall's case to go to court. Once that happens, I'm pretty sure he will be suspended.

I don't have any reason to believe that he knew it was unregistered, but I don't really care either way. He was in shock after his friend shot himself in the leg. I hope Marshawn has learned his lesson.

Why would it be understandable? Because he was wasted? No, that's not understandable.

I'm pretty sure Pierce didn't have a hit and run last year. Also, he wasn't smoking pot. Also, he came clean fairly quickly, and his actions were somewhat understandable after a teammate shot himself in the leg.

So you think we should have offered him the biggest contract ever for a DB? Cause that's what he wanted and got. And look how great he's been since.

Just go to Philly and him and get it over with.

Where did I mention Greer? They didn't think he was worth the $ he was asking for. But Thurman isn't attacking Ralph's spending.

You are going on and on. Every team decides not to re-sign players. The Bills' choices of who to keep and who to let go have certainly puzzled some people over the years, that's one of the reasons we're the most mediocre teams of the decade. But in most cases where they let a player go, they had reasonable concerns about that player. In the case of Williams, I hated to see him go, but they were worried about a guy that big holding up over the long haul. Clements was obviously not worth the $. For each of these players there's a reason they let him go. In the case of Peters, they didn't trust him to keep showing up and working hard once he got the $. I don't blame them. You're allowed to disagree.

First, I didn't say anything about being good boys. Second, these guys played out their contracts, and the Bills decided they did not want to sign them to new contracts, because they didn't feel they were worth the money. There's a huge difference.

Sure, you can ask for a raise when you get a promotion. But when your last raise was more than you had earned at that point, and when you stop showing up for work, you're not going to get it. The first raise came before he had actually established himself as an OT, but the Bills thought he would pretty good, and gave him some pretty good $ up front. He was desperate for it and took it. And as for your attack on Wilson's spending, weren't you the one who was complaining about paying Dockery? It may not have worked out in that case, but you can't have it both ways.

So you have a problem with them bringing in free agents? At the time, there really was almost no negative reaction, because dockery was supposed to be a real force on the interior of the line. They did what they could to et better on the linterior, although granted it didn't work out. Yes, he did out out perform his contract. But when it was given him, he hadn't proven , and the Bills were giving him more than he had earned / deserved at that point with the expectation that he would grow into it. No, they don't. But they couldn't rely on him like they could in previous years, so they got what they could for him.

Also they haven't already redone contracts once before. You can't just do that every other year.

No evidence other than the two times in five years he asked for a reworked contract. And Williams, Greer, Clements, Winfield, etc... these guys were all happy to go to free agency and get new contracts.

No, I didn't miss them, but I obviously don't agree with you. The Bills gave him a contract which was fairly high at that time for a guy who was an unknown RT prospect, with the idea that it was a gamble, but they thought he was worth locking up. They paid him very well, especially considering he was a restricted free agent and his only option was to play for the Bills or not play football in the NFL. As for Stroud, as another poster has already pointed out, the only contract he signed with the Bills was the new one, since he was traded before last season.

Likewise, the team never knows how many years they'll get out of a player, so when they give him a decent signing bonus (which is guaranteed) they expect him to play out his contract assuming he's healthy. Especially after renegotiating his contract once already.

This was a news story right after the trade, and was up on most news sites. Although to some extent it's hard to tell with Jason's intellect if that's really what he was trying to say.

I think the silver lining here is that he hasn't tried to play through it, but rather opted for the surgery in the beginning, so hopefully it will completely heal and make him a factor in the later part of this year.

Other than the other two times in his first five years when he demanded and eventually received a reworked contract.

I'm not buying it now.

Wait, I just realized he wasn't part of OTAs. Still non-football doesn't really mean non-football. It just means he wasn't hurt while a member of the Bills.

I'm pretty sure that it would be classified as a non-football injury even if it happened during OTAs, as long as it happened before he signed his contract and was officially a member of the team.

Anybody who tried to fix a game by bribing Ronnie Harmon is a