Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Similar or the same? It was reported that only the Bears ACTUALLY offered two firsts and the Raiders still had to give up their own 2nd to be able to say, they got 2 1sts out of the deal.
Neither the Jets or Niners made the same and they were "finalists."
Also, any FO will play one team against the other in negotiations and give everyone a chance to 1-up the best offer.
Clearly, we did not make the best offer.
Who was reporting that? People can throw out whatever they want but we heard it straight from the horses mouth (lynch)...people can say he's lying but for the most part this FO and coaching staff have been very transparent.
Gruden made his choice to send him to the Bears and not keep him in their backyard. Turns out it was a bad move for him...again
There are two things to this.
1. We would have never made a trade with the Raiders because of the insane backlash and storyline that would create with these to local franchises. The Raiders would not have traded with us for three firsts in my mind. It is the same idea with Jimmy G and how the Patriots rather not trade him to the Browns for a better deal. I don't believe the same conference BS because Gruden would have traded within the AFC for a good deal if he could and BB would have never traded to help his old team. I really wouldn't blame Gruden for taking us off their list of trade partners for him.
2. While understanding the first point I think it is a knock on Lynch that he couldn't say he made a better offer. The bears actually gave up less than two first round picks to get Mack and with how bad we need an edge rusher and how much cap room we had with the level of player he is, we really should have offered at least 2 first round picks and asked only Mack back in return. You can say we won't know if he did or didn't but I think its pretty obvious we didn't offer a better deal.
says the king of...
says the king of...

, but def not a troll
, but def not a troll