Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sports Illustrated)   Raiders 'strongly considering' acquiring Marshawn Lynch. Seattle signed a 267 lb fatty. Guess nobody wants you, AP   ( si.com) divider line
    More: PSA, National Football League, Pro Bowl selections, Sports Illustrated Terms, Marshawn Lynch, Seattle Seahawks, Oakland Raiders, Adam Schefter, Josina Anderson  
•       •       •

471 clicks; posted to Sports » on 18 Mar 2017 at 3:20 AM (31 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



17 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-03-17 11:39:11 PM  
I guess he'll be going to the Patriots for a Randy Moss contract.
 
2017-03-18 05:32:42 AM  
Beats me
 
2017-03-18 06:37:50 AM  
Teams have really switched their view on AP haven't they?
 
2017-03-18 07:27:25 AM  
I giggle every time I hear someone call Lacy "Feast Mode."
 
2017-03-18 07:47:07 AM  

Aezetyr: Teams have really switched their view on AP haven't they?


I suspect teams would sign him if he'd ask for appropriate compensation. Anything will sell at the right price and it looks like he's just overvaluing himself. All the recent injuries aren't doing him any favors.
 
2017-03-18 08:37:55 AM  
It's weird to me that AP nowadays is almost always discussed as if the child abuse stuff never happened in a way that Ray Riceor Josh Brown, etc never would be. I grew up in small town a long time ago. I'm not shocked or offended that parents spank or smack their kids. The AP stuff however, was sick. If the Packers sign him, I'm probably out until AP and Thompson are both gone. I don't think they will tho.
 
2017-03-18 09:20:13 AM  

Aezetyr: Teams have really switched their view on AP haven't they?


From what I read, most teams that need RB help use the shotgun formation most of the time and AP sucks out of the shotgun.

But it's probably something simple like he's asking too much money for his age and proneness to injury.
 
2017-03-18 11:39:55 AM  
Also of note to this:

Lynch is not a free agent. He is under contract with Seattle, and parked on the reserve/retired list.

For the Raiders or any other team to get him, either Seattle would need to release him outright (which would net them nothing) so he becomes a free agent....or, they could trade him & his existing contract for some one or some thing else.

Just something to keep in mind
 
2017-03-18 11:42:14 AM  

ghostfacekillahrabbit: It's weird to me that AP nowadays is almost always discussed as if the child abuse stuff never happened in a way that Ray Riceor Josh Brown, etc never would be. I grew up in small town a long time ago. I'm not shocked or offended that parents spank or smack their kids. The AP stuff however, was sick. If the Packers sign him, I'm probably out until AP and Thompson are both gone. I don't think they will tho.


I'm with you. I put AP on the list with the Ray Rices of the world. Which is not QUITE as horrific as the Paterno/Sanduskys of the world, but just a small step down.

If Green Bay signed him, it'd be over for me. No way would I (or, even...could I) support a franchise that would reward/enable that
 
2017-03-18 12:07:04 PM  

xaks: Also of note to this:

Lynch is not a free agent. He is under contract with Seattle, and parked on the reserve/retired list.

For the Raiders or any other team to get him, either Seattle would need to release him outright (which would net them nothing) so he becomes a free agent....or, they could trade him & his existing contract for some one or some thing else.

Just something to keep in mind


I don't know if this is accurate; this is just an ESPN blog post, but:

"They have about $14.7 million in cap space, and Lynch would take up $9 million of that. The Seahawks are still looking to add free agents, and they need money to allocate to draft picks (around $5 million)...

...the Seahawks would likely be forced to release Lynch and move on. "

http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/24922/if-marshawn​-​lynch-unretires-seahawks-would-likely-be-forced-to-release-him
 
2017-03-18 12:16:48 PM  

Dr.Fey: xaks: Also of note to this:

Lynch is not a free agent. He is under contract with Seattle, and parked on the reserve/retired list.

For the Raiders or any other team to get him, either Seattle would need to release him outright (which would net them nothing) so he becomes a free agent....or, they could trade him & his existing contract for some one or some thing else.

Just something to keep in mind

I don't know if this is accurate; this is just an ESPN blog post, but:

"They have about $14.7 million in cap space, and Lynch would take up $9 million of that. The Seahawks are still looking to add free agents, and they need money to allocate to draft picks (around $5 million)...

...the Seahawks would likely be forced to release Lynch and move on. "

http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/24922/if-marshawn-​lynch-unretires-seahawks-would-likely-be-forced-to-release-him


If that is what the Raiders want to do with their Cap space, more power to them.  Extensions for Carr and Mack can wait.
 
2017-03-18 12:19:05 PM  

Dr.Fey: xaks: Also of note to this:

Lynch is not a free agent. He is under contract with Seattle, and parked on the reserve/retired list.

For the Raiders or any other team to get him, either Seattle would need to release him outright (which would net them nothing) so he becomes a free agent....or, they could trade him & his existing contract for some one or some thing else.

Just something to keep in mind

I don't know if this is accurate; this is just an ESPN blog post, but:

"They have about $14.7 million in cap space, and Lynch would take up $9 million of that. The Seahawks are still looking to add free agents, and they need money to allocate to draft picks (around $5 million)...

...the Seahawks would likely be forced to release Lynch and move on. "

http://www.espn.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/24922/if-marshawn-​lynch-unretires-seahawks-would-likely-be-forced-to-release-him


BUT

That $9 cap hit is ONLY a thing if he comes off the retired/reserve list in the first place. The Seahawks are under no obligation to move him. They don't *have* to release him to make him happy or do ANYthing. They can stay quiet, do nothing, and squat on his rights.

In that regard, they could be hoping that another team comes up and offers to not only take his contract and cap hit (again, effectively netting Seattle nothing, because the cap hit isn't a thing if he stays retired) but sweeten the deal for them. With an incentive of some kind to do so.

How's that FA market looking as a RB asking over $9M again??
 
2017-03-19 12:20:22 AM  

xaks: BUT

That $9 cap hit is ONLY a thing if he comes off the retired/reserve list in the first place. The Seahawks are under no obligation to move him. They don't *have* to release him to make him happy or do ANYthing. They can stay quiet, do nothing, and squat on his rights.

In that regard, they could be hoping that another team comes up and offers to not only take his contract and cap hit (again, effectively netting Seattle nothing, because the cap hit isn't a thing if he stays retired) but sweeten the deal for them. With an incentive of some kind to do so.

How's that FA market looking as a RB asking over $9M again??


If Lynch chooses to become an active player again the Seahawks will be forced to do something with him. They can't keep a player who un-retires stashed on the retired/reserve list. They will have 3 options:

1. Move him to the active roster - Unlikely as they have no room for his $9M cap hit and have already signed his replacement.

2. Move him to the active roster and attempt to trade him - Unlikely as any team with interest will know about Seattle's cap/roster situation and can simply wait them out.

3. Release his rights and allow him to become a free agent - Almost certainly what would happen should Lynch come back to playing.

The minute Lynch decides he wants to play he'll be a free agent unless the Seahawks try to stall for some deal which won't come. His hometown Raiders are likely the only team he'd come back for anyway and they aren't about to pay $9M a season or take on his existing contract from Seattle. The Hawks have no real choice in the matter.
 
2017-03-19 12:40:16 AM  

the1hatman: xaks: BUT

That $9 cap hit is ONLY a thing if he comes off the retired/reserve list in the first place. The Seahawks are under no obligation to move him. They don't *have* to release him to make him happy or do ANYthing. They can stay quiet, do nothing, and squat on his rights.

In that regard, they could be hoping that another team comes up and offers to not only take his contract and cap hit (again, effectively netting Seattle nothing, because the cap hit isn't a thing if he stays retired) but sweeten the deal for them. With an incentive of some kind to do so.

How's that FA market looking as a RB asking over $9M again??

If Lynch chooses to become an active player again the Seahawks will be forced to do something with him. They can't keep a player who un-retires stashed on the retired/reserve list. They will have 3 options:

1. Move him to the active roster - Unlikely as they have no room for his $9M cap hit and have already signed his replacement.

2. Move him to the active roster and attempt to trade him - Unlikely as any team with interest will know about Seattle's cap/roster situation and can simply wait them out.

3. Release his rights and allow him to become a free agent - Almost certainly what would happen should Lynch come back to playing.

The minute Lynch decides he wants to play he'll be a free agent unless the Seahawks try to stall for some deal which won't come. His hometown Raiders are likely the only team he'd come back for anyway and they aren't about to pay $9M a season or take on his existing contract from Seattle. The Hawks have no real choice in the matter.


This is one of the reasons I really wish they'd re-do the 'retired' system.

I agree that any player should be able to retire any time, for any (or no good) reason.

But there should be stiffer consequences to UN-retiring than simply returning to your old contract. You can really screw over your old team that way, apropos of nothing else and outside of anyone's say.

Not saying a player SHOULDN'T be able to un-retire...it should be doable. But without any recourse or redress from EITHER side of the equation.

I guess we can now add Lynch to Favre on the "fark you, Mr Retired" list
 
2017-03-19 12:19:56 PM  
You can only add Lynch if he actually unretires. People making things up as wants doesn't mean they're going to get it.
 
2017-03-19 12:35:42 PM  

the1hatman: xaks: BUT

That $9 cap hit is ONLY a thing if he comes off the retired/reserve list in the first place. The Seahawks are under no obligation to move him. They don't *have* to release him to make him happy or do ANYthing. They can stay quiet, do nothing, and squat on his rights.

In that regard, they could be hoping that another team comes up and offers to not only take his contract and cap hit (again, effectively netting Seattle nothing, because the cap hit isn't a thing if he stays retired) but sweeten the deal for them. With an incentive of some kind to do so.

How's that FA market looking as a RB asking over $9M again??

If Lynch chooses to become an active player again the Seahawks will be forced to do something with him. They can't keep a player who un-retires stashed on the retired/reserve list. They will have 3 options:

1. Move him to the active roster - Unlikely as they have no room for his $9M cap hit and have already signed his replacement.

2. Move him to the active roster and attempt to trade him - Unlikely as any team with interest will know about Seattle's cap/roster situation and can simply wait them out.

3. Release his rights and allow him to become a free agent - Almost certainly what would happen should Lynch come back to playing.

The minute Lynch decides he wants to play he'll be a free agent unless the Seahawks try to stall for some deal which won't come. His hometown Raiders are likely the only team he'd come back for anyway and they aren't about to pay $9M a season or take on his existing contract from Seattle. The Hawks have no real choice in the matter.


Seattle could do something if he unretired and forces their hand into cutting him.  They can go after his signing bonus.  I recall it being 5-6 million.

Plus if they cut him he has to go through waivers.  Risky for him if he has a desired landing spot. Low chance a team wants his salary of course.  Only real option is he, Seattle and Oakland work something out.
 
2017-03-19 01:21:04 PM  

stappawho: the1hatman: xaks: BUT

That $9 cap hit is ONLY a thing if he comes off the retired/reserve list in the first place. The Seahawks are under no obligation to move him. They don't *have* to release him to make him happy or do ANYthing. They can stay quiet, do nothing, and squat on his rights.

In that regard, they could be hoping that another team comes up and offers to not only take his contract and cap hit (again, effectively netting Seattle nothing, because the cap hit isn't a thing if he stays retired) but sweeten the deal for them. With an incentive of some kind to do so.

How's that FA market looking as a RB asking over $9M again??

If Lynch chooses to become an active player again the Seahawks will be forced to do something with him. They can't keep a player who un-retires stashed on the retired/reserve list. They will have 3 options:

1. Move him to the active roster - Unlikely as they have no room for his $9M cap hit and have already signed his replacement.

2. Move him to the active roster and attempt to trade him - Unlikely as any team with interest will know about Seattle's cap/roster situation and can simply wait them out.

3. Release his rights and allow him to become a free agent - Almost certainly what would happen should Lynch come back to playing.

The minute Lynch decides he wants to play he'll be a free agent unless the Seahawks try to stall for some deal which won't come. His hometown Raiders are likely the only team he'd come back for anyway and they aren't about to pay $9M a season or take on his existing contract from Seattle. The Hawks have no real choice in the matter.

Seattle could do something if he unretired and forces their hand into cutting him.  They can go after his signing bonus.  I recall it being 5-6 million.

Plus if they cut him he has to go through waivers.  Risky for him if he has a desired landing spot. Low chance a team wants his salary of course.  Only real option is he, Seattle and Oakland work something out.


You mis-spelled Las Vegas :P
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report