starrymessenger

Perhaps not, but he would be back on the West Coast & may feel closer to home. Maybe the better point with respect to Seattle is that if anyone can get his head screwed on properly it is Pete Carroll. He knows Lynch very well and I am sure that you are familiar with his work with underprivileged kids, including gang members, in southern California.

Nothing against him. He just needs lots of carries to be effective and I wonder how he is going to get them here. Another reason why he feels somewhat out of sorts I think.

He is only perfect as the feature back, which seems no longer to be the case. Another reason why he is unmotivated here IMO.

Lynch to Seattle for a second makes sense for both teams, and for Marshawn Lynch. My sense of it is that he is not happy in Buffalo and Western NY (where he is not a good fit "culturally"). If he stays there are really only two ways that things can go IMO: Either he finds some maturity and ressurects his career here or the wheels fall off completely and he is probably done as a potentially premier running back. The stakes are high, both for the player and for the team, but mostly for the player. The idea of a happy and fan favorite Marshawn tearing it up as a Bill was a dream that has faded. Too many things have gone wrong, most of which have resulted from his background, his immaturity and the fact that he got most of his rookie contract money upfront in the form of signing bonus and guarantees. Maybe Pete Carroll and the opportunity to renegotiate his contract after a good year will do wonders for Marshawn in Seattle. Obviously I don't know ML but my sense of it is that he is not a bad person. He is young, immature and he has money to spend but I don't think I see a gangster, a thug and a punk. Im sure he knows that this is how he is perceived by many in Buffalo and I believe this affects how he feels about being here (and consequently how he plays here). To some extent he may very well be misunderstood - do you really think he neds to hold people up for 20 bucks?

Absolutely agree on DA in rnd 6-7. Also like Shipley in the 4th (though I think he goes in the 3rd).

That was hilarious.

I fear you may be right.

What a laughable brown nose. Hilarious.

You may not be in a position to draft any of those QBs you like better next year. Then what? You may very well be in a position to draft JC this year. I agree though if you think the guy is just not a good candidate, you don't draft him. Maybe that is where we diagree. I think he is a good risk. Re Bradford, had he come out last year many think he would have been chosen ahead of Stafford. Do you like Stafford (with the benefit of one year hindsight)? If he is not injury prone, and if he can learn to take snaps under centre and still see the field, Bradford is a better prospect. Both Bradford and JC can make all the throws, but Bradford makes them better, and he has better size. The is a reason he is going #1. But I love JCs feistiness and its not as though he is without an excellent skill set. I expect him to have a good pro carreer. He is a fine QB and more ready than Bradford.

If he falls to the Patriots he will buck the trend (and we will ive to regret it). I would not be too sure about Holmgren's intentions either. Its that time of year you know. As for the risks to a franchise, don't you think the Rams are taking on a @#$%load of risk if they do as expected and draft Bradford? Can they (or Detroit last year, or any team for that matter) afford to drop $80MM on a dud QB? You do it in spite of the risks because you need a franchise QB to win in this league. You might say trying to compete in this league is risky - but what choice do you have? You have none. If the tackles are gone and Clausen is there odds are they will take him because he is your best and most probable opportunity to draft a franchise QB.

I suggest you not try too hard. You may give yourself a headache or become disoriented perhaps. But let me see if I can help you. There are two reasons why you should stop trying to figure it out. Firstly, if I truly know for a fact that JC is 17 years old in that picture there is no way for you to know why or how I know that. Secondly, I may not know for a fact that he is 17 years old in that picture, which by the way happens to be the case. This is yet another reason why you will never figure out how I know he is 17 years old in the picture. I visit a lot of message boards and by now I must have seen this picture, and associated negative commentary, 100 times. I have by the way seen the reference to his age in the pic as 17 more than once. Not that the precise number 17 means much to me, but it does seem about right and more importantly illustrates that Clausen and his buddies were just young kids horsing around when the picture was taken. So what is the relevance you say? Well the pic seems to have been relevant to the many who have circulated it with ridicule and serious pejorative comment. Maybe your point is that I should not assert a fact based on hearsay, in which case I would say you are a hard task master, professor. Now if you still don't get it there is nothing more I can do for you. Adios.

Yeah except a smaller one. Where do you think the guy on the left has been sticking his nose. And is that a bullseye on the back of his bathing suit?

Buddy won't be doing that is my guess. Doesn't look the type.

I don't care if hes the friggin Marquis de Sade as long as he can play, which I think he can. Seriously, he was 17 years old when this pic was taken. Like all of the character related red flags, there is nothing there. That guy to the left really is disgusting though.

Who was it that drafted him (or Heyward-Bey ahead of Michael Crabtree)? Oh yes. Well at least it wasn't us.

John you are right about Clausen. The problem is that they are going to draft Tebow instead just to prove that they are dummer than Jacksonville and so that Chan can run his pistol pete offense. God help us.

Wish I knew what those questions are. If all we are talking about are the personality issues, personally I would discount them because none of the claims have been positively substantiated (the clearest indication that they are not true). In terms of his physical skills, what is lacking?

No one has any idea? Disagree. It is clearly not a pure crapshoot. It is a science and due diligence exercise. Brady, Rommo and Warner are clear exceptions. Not to say that picking a college QB is without risk, as we all know it is risky. But someone was always right. There were plenty of pundits who favoured Manning over Leaf.

Agree about the need for scepticism at this time. But do you agree that teams still find ways to telegraph misinformation. If so, seems strange if anyone with a brain in his head is only going to act on the basis of what they actually do rather than what they say or imply. I mean why bother.

My feelings exactly, which is one reason I want Clausen and not Tebow.

Certainly those are the vibes currently, possibly emanating from OBD. Not very helpful, but either it is true or it is orchestrated.

Have no problem introducing a little "imagination" into the standard pro offence. Finns and Sparano too used the wildcat to advantage. Problem is NFL defences adjust to it and, frankly, the crux of it is that I don't think Tim Tebow is a good candidate to execute a diversified pro offence even within a "system". In other words, as Trestman himself has said, right now at the NFL level TT is system constrained. To me that clearly rules him out as a first round pick.

Marshawn and Tim Tebow. Hmmmm...a clash of cultural opposites if ever there was one. Don't get me wrong. I have a lot of time for Tebow, who is one of the greatest college players of all time, has off the charts intangibles and is just a first rate quality individual. Don't like him at #9 and don't necessarily like him at the QB position. If as a QB his "system" options are limited (and even Trestman, who is in his camp, has said so) it will only be a matter of time (not long) before NFL defenses figure out how to shut him, and the Bills offence, down. I know that not everyone agrees, but I am with those who see Claussen as a bona fide franchise QB, and that obviously influences my opinion of what we should do if he is there at #9.

And that is exactly why Tim Tebow has gone from a third round pick at best three weeks ago to a potential first round pick in the view of many qualified commentators. The expectations re Chan's offence is what is driving this, together with the need to sell tickets in Jacksonville. If Claussen and Tebow are both there at #9, picking Tebow would not be taking the best player available (even at the position) and would be a monumental error IMO. Worst case: we draft Tebow to suit Chan and Claussen falls to .....The New England Patriots. We would be kicking ourselves for another 10-12 years.

That is precisely my fear (though it must be a smokescreen - they can't be that stupid, can they?).