Would you trade Lynch for Boldin?

[Alphadawg7]

I KNOW this is just speculating and is unlikely to happen, but what else do we have to do right now but speculate and wonder about possibilities right, even unlikely ones...lol

 

What if we offer AZ Lynch for Boldin in trade this offseason?

 

Given Boldins conract situation, the money they have in Fitz, and the emergance of Breston, the Cards may look to trade Boldin. Plus, Boldin has stated he would not sign again in AZ as he has felt lied to. Don't know if he still feels the same way now, but that was earlier this year and not that long ago.

 

AZ has a glaring hole at RB going into next year with Hightower having the worst YPC in the league and not looking like an everydown back and Edge on his last legs and likely gone next year.

 

We need a Boldin type WR badly and have 2 stud RB's...so, would it make sense to offer AZ Lynch for Boldin? I think Lynch is great, but we also have Jackson who I think is capable of being a really good everydown back too.

 

What line up would look better...Evans, Boldin, Jackson...or Evans, Reed/Johnson, Lynch?

 

Its a win win...AZ gets a proven young stud RB, we get a proven stud WR in his prime...fills huge needs with both teams and neither team loses too much given they have capable replacements for the departed players...We can handle Boldins contract demands too given how far under the cap we likely are.

[stinky finger]

No thanks. I like Boldin, but we'll have to figure out another way to get him.

[Alphadawg7]

No thanks. I like Boldin, but we'll have to figure out another way to get him.

 

So, does that mean you think Evans, Reed/Johnson, and Lynch is a better lineup than Boldin, Evans, and Jackson?

[Magox]

Hell No!!!

[Lv-Bills]

I'd do it in a minute.

 

Boldin, Evans, Reed, Jackson, and Edwards > Evans, Reed, Parrish, Lynch and Edwards

 

Love Marshawn, but RB's are the easiest to replace, especially if the Bills would address the line.

[C.Biscuit97]

I love Boldin and this trade is a feasible one considering how long running backs last. But this is Buffalo. Let's build a team for Buffalo. Right now, we have a top 5 running back combo. Let's finish the line, run the ball 60% of the time (and a 60-40 split with Lynch and Jackson), and run play action with at least a shot every quarter down field. That's how we can become a good team again.

[Lv-Bills]

I'd do it in a minute.

 

Boldin, Evans, Reed, Jackson, and Edwards > Evans, Reed, Parrish, Lynch and Edwards

 

Love Marshawn, but RB's are the easiest to replace, especially if the Bills would address the line.

I even have to reply to myself here......lol......if you added a Free Agent, pass catching TE, to the Boldin, Evans, Reed, Jackson and Edwards offense....I would almost dare to say that would be a damn near unstoppable pass offense to cover.

[The_Real]

Depends if they'd leave him on the field in critical situations and whether or not he'd argue with our OC.

 

 

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

It seems like it's creating a hole for the sake of filling another hole. Boldin is a fantastic talent, and pure #1 receiver. Would be a great addition. However Lynch/Jackson can be a rb duo on par with Jacobs/Ward Williams/Stewart etc etc. If it's not broke don't fix it. Bring in Amani Toomer, a receiving tight end, and work on becoming a power running team.

[Lv-Bills]

I love Boldin and this trade is a feasible one considering how long running backs last. But this is Buffalo. Let's build a team for Buffalo. Right now, we have a top 5 running back combo. Let's finish the line, run the ball 60% of the time (and a 60-40 split with Lynch and Jackson), and run play action with at least a shot every quarter down field. That's how we can become a good team again.

If you had defenses worrying about covering that offense, the running game would open up immensely. Offense is offense, it can be built many different ways. I think it has snowed and has been just as sh------- in NE over the last few years than in Buffalo, and they built an unstoppable passing game two years ago.

 

We could do the sa,me.

[Beerball]

Just thinking out loud here.

A running back for a top tier WR? yes, I can look past his tantrum

Boldin will be 29 next season

Lynch is a Mack truck and will miss games each season

Boldin is likely to be highly productive for another 4-5 years

Lynch has that certain something that really makes you want him to succeed

Boldin's receptions the past 3 years 83, 71, 89

Boldin 40 career TDs

Boldin missed 4 games each of the past 2 years

 

Yeah, I would do that.

[bobobonators]

I wouldn't want that. While Jackson has been great, I'm not sure how I feel about him starting the entire season. What if Jackson goes down? The combination of Lynch/Jackson completely addresses the RB position with both quality and depth.

 

I would, however, be willing to give up our 2nd rounder for him.

[Lv-Bills]

It seems like it's creating a hole for the sake of filling another hole. Boldin is a fantastic talent, and pure #1 receiver. Would be a great addition. However Lynch/Jackson can be a rb duo on par with Jacobs/Ward Williams/Stewart etc etc. If it's not broke don't fix it. Bring in Amani Toomer, a receiving tight end, and work on becoming a power running team.

BS.....Jackson is already capable. Boldin is a stud. Evans would be better, and Reed would be the Wes Welker type. Unstoppable combo there. Jackson would handle the load and we could find the backup RB, much easier than adding another crappy medicore WR. Since this would be a trade, the Bills could still spend money on a pass catching TE, and this offense would be explosive.

 

This is actually a great deal for both teams.

[bobobonators]

If you had defenses worrying about covering that offense, the running game would open up immensely. Offense is offense, it can be built many different ways. I think it has snowed and has been just as sh------- in NE over the last few years than in Buffalo, and they built an unstoppable passing game two years ago.

 

We could do the sa,me.

 

I agree in theory. In practice, however, I'm not sure how much of an impact boldin would have on this offense. We rarely ever go deep, and Trent at times has shown that even when WRs are wide open, he still won't throw to them.

 

Boldin would be a waste of talent in this offense until Trent improves significantly

 

IMO.

[Alphadawg7]

I wouldn't want that. While Jackson has been great, I'm not sure how I feel about him starting the entire season. What if Jackson goes down? The combination of Lynch/Jackson completely addresses the RB position with both quality and depth.

 

I would, however, be willing to give up our 2nd rounder for him.

 

Look at what Roy Williams fetched...you think AZ trades arguably one of the top 4 or 5 WR's in the game for a 2nd after the fleecing Det did with Roy? I would say a 1st and some change would be the min. Last year, Wash offered Cincy 2 1st rd picks for that head case Chad Johnson, and Anquan is a far better teammate and a way better WR than Ocho Cinco who I wouldnt even list in the top 10 at WR.

[bobobonators]

BS.....Jackson is already capable. Boldin is a stud. Evans would be better, and Reed would be the Wes Welker type. Unstoppable combo there. Jackson would handle the load and we could find the backup RB, much easier than adding another crappy medicore WR. Since this would be a trade, the Bills could still spend money on a pass catching TE, and this offense would be explosive.

 

This is actually a great deal for both teams.

 

How exactly do you know if Jackson is capable? Jackson isn't like Turner was in San Diego (in terms of experience/attempts), and isn't built like Turner (short/stocky/powerful).

 

I love Jackson, don't get me wrong. I'm just not sure about saying automatically that Jackson is "ready" to be the feature back for an entire season.

 

I also love Boldin..however, I'm just not sure that diminishing one critical position to improve another critical position makes this offense that much better.

[Alphadawg7]

I agree in theory. In practice, however, I'm not sure how much of an impact boldin would have on this offense. We rarely ever go deep, and Trent at times has shown that even when WRs are wide open, he still won't throw to them.

 

Boldin would be a waste of talent in this offense until Trent improves significantly

 

IMO.

 

Thats what is great about Boldin for us, you dont have to go deep to get him the ball. He takes short throws and turns them into long plays, a perfect complement for the type of player Trent is. This guy goes over the middle and is fantastic after the catch...

[bobobonators]

Look at what Roy Williams fetched...you think AZ trades arguably one of the top 4 or 5 WR's in the game for a 2nd after the fleecing Det did with Roy? I would say a 1st and some change would be the min. Last year, Wash offered Cincy 2 1st rd picks for that head case Chad Johnson, and Anquan is a far better teammate and a way better WR than Ocho Cinco who I wouldnt even list in the top 10 at WR.

 

Point taken. I completely forgot about Johnson.

 

Would you trade our first then for Boldin? I'm not sure if I would.

 

Probably the most I would be willing to give up would be this year's second and next year's second. It Probably wouldn't get it done..but then so be it.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

BS.....Jackson is already capable. Boldin is a stud. Evans would be better, and Reed would be the Wes Welker type. Unstoppable combo there. Jackson would handle the load and we could find the backup RB, much easier than adding another crappy medicore WR. Since this would be a trade, the Bills could still spend money on a pass catching TE, and this offense would be explosive.

 

This is actually a great deal for both teams.

 

 

I don't disagree. However in the post season I'm saying teams win with power running games, not explosive passing games. Yes I prefer the running game to the passing game. It was on the legs of Maroney that NE made it past jacksonville and sd to get to the Superbowl last year, and it was on the legs of Addai and Rhodes that the colts won the superbowl. For as great as Arizona's passing game is. They're winning the post season, because of their commitment to Edge/HighTower which has forced defenses to become accountable for their running game. Yeah I would keep Lynch/Jackson and look elsewhere for a wr. I'd prefer the funds spent on 2 wr's, could be better allocated to stuff like, improving the defense.

[Lv-Bills]

I agree in theory. In practice, however, I'm not sure how much of an impact boldin would have on this offense. We rarely ever go deep, and Trent at times has shown that even when WRs are wide open, he still won't throw to them.

 

Boldin would be a waste of talent in this offense until Trent improves significantly

 

IMO.

No way in hell. Did you ever see Boldin run after the catch? It has been so long that we've had any kind of talent in here that people's brains have warped I think.

 

Boldin makes plays anywhere on the field. Deep, short, over the middle, screens, period. He's a stud. Period. Evans would then benefit tremedously from this. THEN, Reed goes in over the middle as the possesion guy. Turk would be like a kid in a candy store with those guys. Add Jackson's hands out of the backfield, and then a pass catching TE to the mix.

 

Now, tell me, what team in our division could cover all those guys on one 3 WR, 1 RB, 1 TE set? I know the Pats and their aging assed LB's couldn't. The Jets? Ummm no. The Dolphins? Not at this time. We would actually have teams in our division having to adapt their defenses to stop all of our options. Those 3-4 rush LB's could easily get burned if Edwards was up to the task with reading coverages.

 

I like it more and more. Plus, Arizona needs a RB. I love Lynch, but in this case........see ya

[bobobonators]

Thats what is great about Boldin for us, you dont have to go deep to get him the ball. He takes short throws and turns them into long plays, a perfect complement for the type of player Trent is. This guy goes over the middle and is fantastic after the catch...

 

I know. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean that we would have to go deep with Boldin. What my post meant to say is that this offense (passing attack) is limited both in the deep ball, and even when WRs are open underneath due to the shaky QB play. Boldin to me wouldn't be nearly as effective here as he was in arizona with Warner..for sure.

 

Again, I love Boldin...but again, this team has a great thing already in Lynch/Jackson..it's arguably our strongest weapon on offense..so why would we want to break it up?

 

If we had a sure-thing at QB, then I think I would be much more willing to make such a trade. But Boldin's effectiveness will completely rely on Edward's play - which at times has been extremely, extremely, poor.

[Brandon]

No, I don't think I would. For the first time in quite a while, the Bills have something on offense that actually works, that being their running game. I would hate to screw that up, only to find that Boldin *isn't* the answer to our passing game woes. Although there's plenty of reason to believe that Boldin would come in and instantly improve the Bills' passing game, there is certainly no guarantee. Its not a risk I'd be willing to take.

[Lv-Bills]

I don't disagree. However in the post season I'm saying teams win with power running games, not explosive passing games. Yes I prefer the running game to the passing game. It was on the legs of Maroney that NE made it past jacksonville and sd to get to the Superbowl last year, and it was on the legs of Addai and Rhodes that the colts won the superbowl. For as great as Arizona's passing game is. They're winning the post season, because of their commitment to Edge/HighTower which has forced defenses to become accountable for their running game. Yeah I would keep Lynch/Jackson and look elsewhere for a wr. I'd prefer the funds spent on 2 wr's, could be better allocated to stuff like, improving the defense.

And this was thrown right out the door this year with Arizona. Last year, the Pats went 18-0 before losing a close game to New York with an explosive passing game.

 

And there's no way in hell, Indy goes anywhere without Peyton Manning throwing the ball. And New England was an explosive passing team last year, and they are the poster child for subbing in bad RB's, making the case even more for a Boldin for Lunch trade. Lamont Jordan, Sammy Morris, Maroney, Faulk, Dillon, Green-Ellis, and all the other stop gaps they have ran out there.

 

RB's are a dime a dozen. About the only unstoppable guy in this league at RB is Adrian Peterson. Not saying there aren't others, but he is about the only guy that can be counted on every week to win a game for you. And even that doesn't bode too well for the Vikes as their record has shown.

[bobobonators]

No way in hell. Did you ever see Boldin run after the catch? It has been so long that we've had any kind of talent in here that people's brains have warped I think.

 

Boldin makes plays anywhere on the field. Deep, short, over the middle, screens, period. He's a stud. Period. Evans would then benefit tremedously from this. THEN, Reed goes in over the middle as the possesion guy. Turk would be like a kid in a candy store with those guys. Add Jackson's hands out of the backfield, and then a pass catching TE to the mix.

 

Now, tell me, what team in our division could cover all those guys on one 3 WR, 1 RB, 1 TE set? I know the Pats and their aging assed LB's couldn't. The Jets? Ummm no. The Dolphins? Not at this time. We would actually have teams in our division having to adapt their defenses to stop all of our options. Those 3-4 rush LB's could easily get burned if Edwards was up to the task with reading coverages.

 

I like it more and more. Plus, Arizona needs a RB. I love Lynch, but in this case........see ya

 

Again, this kind of logic revolves around one thing: the ability of our QB to get the ball into their hands.

 

I could name you 3-4 games last season where we could've had God at WR, Moses at TE, and Jesus Christ in the backfield, and Trent still wouldn't have found them open in coverage.

 

Maybe trent improves this season (i hope), but maybe he won't. NOw, imagine if Trent doesn't improve much at all, and now we're down Lynch as well. Boldin's addition will be meaningless and in fact, turn out to be detrimental.

[Lv-Bills]

I know. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean that we would have to go deep with Boldin. What my post meant to say is that this offense (passing attack) is limited both in the deep ball, and even when WRs are open underneath due to the shaky QB play. Boldin to me wouldn't be nearly as effective here as he was in arizona with Warner..for sure.

 

Again, I love Boldin...but again, this team has a great thing already in Lynch/Jackson..it's arguably our strongest weapon on offense..so why would we want to break it up?

 

If we had a sure-thing at QB, then I think I would be much more willing to make such a trade. But Boldin's effectiveness will completely rely on Edward's play - which at times has been extremely, extremely, poor.

Again, BS. The passing game isn't all the effective because it has Lee Evans, Josh Reed, and Roscoe Parrish as it's options. Period. This is Anquan Boldin. The guy makes plays with any QB. And Evans would be that much better. Hell, Calvin Johnson makes plays in Detroit, because he's a stud. The same would happen here.

[Alphadawg7]

Again, I love Boldin...but again, this team has a great thing already in Lynch/Jackson..it's arguably our strongest weapon on offense..so why would we want to break it up?

 

 

Why? Because being one dimensional with a weak passing game got us a 7-9 record the last 2 years...

 

The more I think about this, the more sense it makes for BOTH teams...which is probably why it wont happen because it makes too much sense...lol.

[bobobonators]

Why? Because being one dimensional with a weak passing game got us a 7-9 record the last 2 years...

 

The more I think about this, the more sense it makes for BOTH teams...which is probably why it wont happen because it makes too much sense...lol.

 

Yes, I agree. But ask yourself this: Was it a weak passing game b/c of our WR's, or more b/c of our QB and playcalling?

 

I honestly think it was much more the latter than the former meaning that Boldin's addition would ultimately do little to improve the offense until the latter is addressed.

 

What comes first I guess, the chicken or the egg? In this case, Edwards has shown that even when WR's are WIDE OPEN, he has been unable to get them the ball. Sure, Boldin would be a great addition on paper, but how would that translate on the field in our system? I'm not so sure about that part. Sad, but true.

[Lv-Bills]

Again, this kind of logic revolves around one thing: the ability of our QB to get the ball into their hands.

 

I could name you 3-4 games last season where we could've had God at WR, Moses at TE, and Jesus Christ in the backfield, and Trent still wouldn't have found them open in coverage.

 

Maybe trent improves this season (i hope), but maybe he won't. NOw, imagine if Trent doesn't improve much at all, and now we're down Lynch as well. Boldin's addition will be meaningless and in fact, turn out to be detrimental.

And this is the kind of backwards ass, gutless logic that I hate. Because while you could name me 3-4 games last year where our QB coudln't get Jesus Christ the ball, I can name about 8 games where our QB's did get a below average WR corps the ball....meaning Evans, Reed and Parrish.

 

Now, imagine if that WR was lead by Boldin......bad things man, bad things. You all act like Edwards was horrible every game. He has started a handful of games in this league and has shown flashes with a crappy supporting cast. Give him some weapons, and see how those mediocre games become more than solid.

 

Curt Warner could have been the Bills QB last year, and you bet your ass he'd have about 20 INT's and would be retiring this season, with the subpar skill people around him.

[bobobonators]

Again, BS. The passing game isn't all the effective because it has Lee Evans, Josh Reed, and Roscoe Parrish as it's options. Period. This is Anquan Boldin. The guy makes plays with any QB. And Evans would be that much better. Hell, Calvin Johnson makes plays in Detroit, because he's a stud. The same would happen here.

 

Alright, fine. You're right. I'm wrong. Whatever you like.

[Alphadawg7]

I like this so much, I added it to my signature...lol...

[Lv-Bills]

Yes, I agree. But ask yourself this: Was it a weak passing game b/c of our WR's, or more b/c of our QB and playcalling?

 

I honestly think it was much more the latter than the former meaning that Boldin's addition would ultimately do little to improve the offense until the latter is addressed.

 

What comes first I guess, the chicken or the egg? In this case, Edwards has shown that even when WR's are WIDE OPEN, he has been unable to get them the ball. Sure, Boldin would be a great addition on paper, but how would that translate on the field in our system? I'm not so sure about that part. Sad, but true.

Well, I don't. Our WR's suck. I can't, for the life of me figure out, how some of you can actually watch pro football, and not figure out that our WR's suck. Evans is above average. And the crap after that is pure pathetic.

 

When you watch guys like Boldin, Fitzgerald, Steve Smith, Hines Ward, and some of these other elite WR's go after the ball, it should show you that we have bad WR's.

 

Now, Joe Flacco on the other hand has pretty much done nothing as far as I've seen. He stares at Derrick Mason constantnly, and throws incomplete deep balls every now and then. But that makes him good I guess. The Ravens lost because they have ZERO offense. Yet, Trent, who has shown flashes of very good play, is terrible.

 

Give Trent weapons, and he's above average. Hell, Give Flacco better weapons and he's above average. Boldin is a game changer. We don't have one of those. Period. Anytime I have a chance to get a gamechanger in his 20's, that isn't a RB, I do it.

[bobobonators]

And this is the kind of backwards ass, gutless logic that I hate. Because while you could name me 3-4 games last year where our QB coudln't get Jesus Christ the ball, I can name about 8 games where our QB's did get a below average WR corps the ball....meaning Evans, Reed and Parrish.

 

Now, imagine if that WR was lead by Boldin......bad things man, bad things. You all act like Edwards was horrible every game. He has started a handful of games in this league and has shown flashes with a crappy supporting cast. Give him some weapons, and see how those mediocre games become more than solid.

 

Curt Warner could have been the Bills QB last year, and you bet your ass he'd have about 20 INT's and would be retiring this season, with the subpar skill people around him.

 

Other than three 4th quarters at the beginning of the year, and the KC game, Edwards was pretty horrible the rest of the season. Just look at the numbers.

 

And you're also fixated on Boldin, but refuse to address the loss of Lynch as if he means absolutely NOTHING to this offense.

 

What happens if Jackson goes down with an injury in week 2? Bad things man, bad things. That's what.

[Magox]

Genius!!!

 

Trade Peters, Trade Lynch our two best offensive players...

 

As much as I would love to have Boldin, I would never think about trading Lynch for him. Maybe 2009 2nd round 3rd round pick and a 2010 2nd rounder.

 

Lynch right now is the heart and soul of this offense and I wouldnt be surprised to see him be a probowler next year.

 

I've got a good concept,

Let's build around our stars, not trade them.

 

Peters, Lynch, Evans and Edwards. These are the one's we need to build our team around.

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

What happens if Jackson goes down with an injury in week 2? Bad things man, bad things. That's what.

 

Sorry man, I hate this logic. What happens if Payton Manning goes down in Week 2? Should INDY be trying to trade with NE to get Cassel or Brady as insurance? You cant pass up a chance to get an ELITE every down player at a skill position like WR just to have insurance at an easily filled position like RB...

 

One, RB is the easiest position to replace...look around the NFL, they constantly find producers in late rounds or even undrafted at RB...heck, look at Jackson in Buffalo. Two, Oman I think can be a capable backup who never got to show what he can do. Three, even if Oman isnt, we can find another backup in the draft or FA market that could fill in nicely if that was case.

 

It would much easier to find a competent backup also becasue our Passing game now would command much more respect which in turns opens up the ground game.

[Alphadawg7]

Genius!!!

 

Trade Peters, Trade Lynch our two best offensive players...

 

As much as I would love to have Boldin, I would never think about trading Lynch for him. Maybe 2009 2nd round 3rd round pick and a 2010 2nd rounder.

 

Lynch right now is the heart and soul of this offense and I wouldnt be surprised to see him be a probowler next year.

 

I've got a good concept,

Let's build around our stars, not trade them.

 

Peters, Lynch, Evans and Edwards. These are the one's we need to build our team around.

 

 

 

Boldin tremendously upgrades our WR spot...The dropoff from Lynch to Jackson is minor...so we take a minor (and even thats debateable) hit at RB and MASSIVELY upgrade WR which is a much harder position to fill in the first place...

[Anzaloha]

I love Boldin and this trade is a feasible one considering how long running backs last. But this is Buffalo. Let's build a team for Buffalo. Right now, we have a top 5 running back combo. Let's finish the line, run the ball 60% of the time (and a 60-40 split with Lynch and Jackson), and run play action with at least a shot every quarter down field. That's how we can become a good team again.

 

You imply that the Bills know what play action is. When was the last time they even ran a play action play?

[Lv-Bills]

Other than three 4th quarters at the beginning of the year, and the KC game, Edwards was pretty horrible the rest of the season. Just look at the numbers.

 

And you're also fixated on Boldin, but refuse to address the loss of Lynch as if he means absolutely NOTHING to this offense.

 

What happens if Jackson goes down with an injury in week 2? Bad things man, bad things. That's what.

Trent wasn't terrible. And the fact that he had a HUGE part in winning those games at the beginning....what should we do, jsut throw that out? The more and more I look at it, Trent, is about right on par with Joe Flacco, but Flacco gets all of this pub. I'm not saying Trent is an all pro, but the fact that' he's young and has shown flashes means he has the talent.

 

I'm not fixated on Boldin, I'm fixated on a STUD player. And yeah, I think Jasckson could be the next Michael Turner in terms of success. Not with the same type of power running game, but in terms of success, yes.

 

Again, which has been proven over and over and over, it's much easier to find RB help than WR help. I'd take Boldin, in our situation.

[bobobonators]

Sorry man, I hate this logic. What happens if Payton Manning goes down in Week 2? Should INDY be trying to trade with NE to get Cassel or Brady as insurance? You cant pass up a chance to get an ELITE every down player at a skill position like WR just to have insurance at an easily filled position like RB...

 

One, RB is the easiest position to replace...look around the NFL, they constantly find producers in late rounds or even undrafted at RB...heck, look at Jackson in Buffalo. Two, Oman I think can be a capable backup who never got to show what he can do. Three, even if Oman isnt, we can find another backup in the draft or FA market that could fill in nicely if that was case.

 

It would much easier to find a competent backup also becasue our Passing game now would command much more respect which in turns opens up the ground game.

 

The passing game would demand more respect? Ya, and the running game would demand much LESS respect. The problem with this ENTIRE thread is that you're automatically assuming that the addition of Boldin will make Edwards better. What if Edwards/and the Bills playcalling make Boldin worse? Boldin is great but he can't pass himself the ball.

 

I think the fundamental disagreement you and I have is that I feel that our main problem last year, and the year before has NOT been our WR's, but instead it's clearly been our QB's and playcalling. Whereas you feel that it's simply our WR's that are the problem. That way, under your logic, improve the WR and everything is better. Well, I disagree fundamentally with your logic. Sure, we could use an improvement at WR...but we don't necessarily need Boldin to improve, and this point is stressed even more by the fact that we would have to give up our heart and soul of the offense , in lynch, to get Boldin.

[Lv-Bills]

Sorry man, I hate this logic. What happens if Payton Manning goes down in Week 2? Should INDY be trying to trade with NE to get Cassel or Brady as insurance? You cant pass up a chance to get an ELITE every down player at a skill position like WR just to have insurance at an easily filled position like RB...

 

One, RB is the easiest position to replace...look around the NFL, they constantly find producers in late rounds or even undrafted at RB...heck, look at Jackson in Buffalo. Two, Oman I think can be a capable backup who never got to show what he can do. Three, even if Oman isnt, we can find another backup in the draft or FA market that could fill in nicely if that was case.

 

It would much easier to find a competent backup also becasue our Passing game now would command much more respect which in turns opens up the ground game.

Bingo. LMAO. Gotta love the what if X player gets hurt stuff. Hell, what if Evans gets hurt in the current offense. I'd be hard pressed to think we could actually complete more than 5 passes per game to our WR's.

 

With Boldin, he would have 5 catches automatic.

[Magox]

Boldin tremendously upgrades our WR spot...The dropoff from Lynch to Jackson is minor...so we take a minor (and even thats debateable) hit at RB and MASSIVELY upgrade WR which is a much harder position to fill in the first place...

The dropoff is minor?????

 

How did you come to this conclusion? I would love to have to Boldin, but not at the expense of Lynch.

 

I can see it now, The Bills QB happens to not throw to Boldin enough (in his view) he starts complaining and running his mouth, then everyone here on this message board will be suggesting that we trade Boldin for someone else.

 

Lynch has shown heart, dedication, production. He is a keeper, we Build around him not look to shop him.