Chiefs Gameday Thread
Well, this is a big test. If O'Connell can learn from his mistakes and minimize turnovers, we could steal one. Ya never know! GO RAIDERS!
posted by Raider Take at 1:29 PM
Well, this is a big test. If O'Connell can learn from his mistakes and minimize turnovers, we could steal one. Ya never know! GO RAIDERS!
posted by Raider Take at 1:29 PM
55 Comments:
The Raiders were meh. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't good either. Briefly encouraging to see them go up 14-0, but then they gave up 21 unanswered pts. And missing the short FG instead of going on 4th down was a mistake. It's the Chiefs!
In the end, play calling had a lot to do with the results. Horrible call with a run up the middle on 4th and one against Chris Jones and that Chiefs interior. The flea flicker with Meyers throwing the ball. What the hell was that? I think maybe Hardegree has run out of plays.
Jacobs dropped two easy passes. But at some point, the Raiders need to put a game in AOC's hands. He should be throwing down field to his WRs.
Defense looked good at times, but the Chiefs had entire drives that every play went for 10 or more yards. Too many open Chiefs receivers in zone coverage. DBs were bad.
Lots of work to do.
Advantage Harbaugh. Come on do any of us look forward to Bo Hardagree. AOC and AP matching wits with Mahomes and Reid for the next 5 years---no thanks.
Sandy
Sounds like you've tuned out the rest of the 2023 season.
Your expectation of AP is a lot higher than it was of Gruden. AP guy took over in the middle of the season. He's had no chance to create his own image of the Raiders, and I certainly wouldn't assume Hardegree would have been his first choice as OC, nor AOC his first choice at QB. You're looking down a very narrow lane.
Raiders were 6-7 before they went on a 4-game winning streak to the playoffs in 2021.
It's becoming clear that while AP brings the emotion and the hard work effort, the X's & 0's are lacking. Not blaming him, or even Hardegree, just that they appear in over their heads.
In four games since AP/Hardegree, Raiders have scored just one 2nd half TD. That just isn't gonna cut it in the NFL.
As Sandy points out, Raider coaches have to match wits with Reid, and Payton, four times every year going forward. there is some thought that Sean McVie might walk across the sideline and become HC of the Chargers next year. That would be some hill to climb for AP/Hardegree, just in the division alone.
I think if it's at all possible, Jim Harbaugh, or even Sean McVie would be a lot better option for Raiders at this point.
Let's be fair, Hardegree wasn't vetted to be OC, he was thrown into the job because the Raiders had no options. Same could be said about Pierce. But, IMO, it needs to play out.
I have nothing against upgrading HC, but I think if we're objectively calling balls and strikes there are many things to consider. Realistically, Mark Davis is out approximately $100M in guarantees made to Ziegler/McDaniels and Garoppolo. Plus whatever he lost with Gruden. And the time wasted is 20 years and counting. The team surged under Bisaccia, then regressed under McDaniels. It's again shown life under Pierce despite the most unusual circumstances of rookie HC, rookie GM, rookie OC and rookie QB. Something impressive about all that.
That's partly why I want the process to play out.
Pierce/Graham benched Marcus Peters in the Chiefs game. It was clear Peters was avoiding tackles, and he has been all season. This is another consideration in evaluating the interim regime. Raiders under Ziegler/McDaniels made some horrendous personnel decisions.
NYR...I agree the Raiders would have been better off rewarding the success of Bisaccia, rather then going for the shiny object of McDaniels.
But what are we seeing here with AP/Hardegree ? They are lost in the crucial 2nd half of games.
2 field goals vs Giants. 1 TD vs Jets, 0 points vs Fish, and 3 points vs Chefs. Like i said, this won't cut it.
It's hard to judge with a rookie Qb, and so many bad players on the roster. So let it play out, but it looks like Raiders won't win another game this season.
Tied 14-14 at halftime. Reid made adjustments, and Chefs rolled from there. It's all about coaching, and the Raiders just don't have it.
Vic Tafur is reporting the Raiders will probably cut Peters before the end of the bye. I am ok with that since he doesnt even attempt to tackle. I was glad to hear he was benched. I would like to see what AP can do as HC with a proper OC and QB. I feel like if we had Derek Carr yesterday, Raiders would have won. Guess we will never know. I like Caleb Williams, and I think he would do well in the AFC West. I think a HC like AP would help develop him. I am also intrigued by rumors of Justin Fields being released. Raiders need a high impact QB and OC
Ghost, maybe what is being lost is their success early in games. They don't have the resources yet to expand game plans nor, in some cases, make the adjustments they want to. Literally, they are benching vet players at key positions for underperforming, as they did Sunday with Marcus Peters, and as they did weeks ago with Jimmy Garoppolo. So comparing the Raiders staff and players to the Chiefs at this moment in time is completely unfair.
What we are seeing is an interim HC elevating the team above anything put out by the previous regime.
It's a work in progress and it's had moments of genuine progress. We've all seen it.
No turnovers by the Raiders yesterday. Clearly, some bad play calls, and two drops by Jacobs. Spillane has developed into an enforcer in the middle of the Raiders defense. They continue to rely more heavily on Jenkins and Adams on the interior line, and Koonce appears to be coming into his own as an edge player. These things only scratch the surface of what they need to accomplish but it's the hand that Pierce was dealt.
To me, releasing Marcus Peters speaks volumes. Peters is well-respected, but nobody deserves a free ride.
Nate, with the Bears likely to select a franchise QB from next year's deep draft class, and so many teams ahead of the Raiders in draft, trading for Justin Fields might be a real option. He's a playmaker, and not the reason the Bears suck.
Nate...Do you really think Derek Carr would have won the Chefs game ? Carr couldn't even beat the Falcons yesterday.
Carr performance for the Saints this year has been pretty mediocre. Justin Fields has been mediocre or worse for the Bears. Plus, Fields runs a lot and tends to get injured.
Now Russell Wilson had been mediocre to bad the previous two seasons with Donks. Enter Sean Payton, and Wilson has been much better. So I would say finding the right head coach is more important than even finding the right QB.
For Mark Davis to hire Jim Harbaugh, he will need to cough up another $10M a year contract. Harbaugh has a much better career record than Gruden, so maybe he will, but Harbaugh's been out of the NFL for 13 years. Lots to consider.
Ghost, Carr's worst day is equivalent to any of the Raiders' QBs best day. Didn't watch his specific performance against the Falcons; but heard their whole offensive game calling was lame duck.
NY, two things. First, I'm not big on obtaining Harbaugh, I'd rather see Pierce with an experienced and fiery OC who can compete against Sean Payton and Andy Reid.
Second, another Raiders' stat for Sunday other than no turnovers, they had no penalties. When was the last time we could say that? Just Win, Baby!
Pierce's story will write itself. If he implodes during the rest of the season, he will quietly disappear. But if he continues to keep the team in games and team spirits are high, he might be difficult to replace. Not sure he even needs to win, just keep things upbeat and professional. It's his job to lose, IMO. The players are on his side. Mark Davis already chose AP over other options, so he already has high level of confidence.
I'm not saying Harhaugh isn't the better choice, but I do know MD already got burned hiring McDaniels over Bisaccia.
No turnovers and no penalties against the Chiefs. If you're building a team, that's a good place to start. Raiders are way behind the Chiefs curve, so expecting AP to make Reid-type adjustments during the game is unrealistic and unfair. Pierce was dealt a bad hand with McDaniels team, yet they seem behind him 100%.
Guys Pierce beat the giants and jets give me a break. Sandy
It's not up to me. I'm merely making an observation. It will play right in front of us. But I wouldn't set your expectations too high, that may lead to disappointment.
Sandy,
McDaniels couldn't beat the Bears, so beating the Giants and Jets are a big deal
Sure Nate if your measuring stick is failure. If your kids get a D in school do you tell him don't worry that's better than an F? Sandy
We're seeing a cohesion with the team that didn't exist with McDaniels, and far exceeds many prior regimes, IMO. The Raiders were tested against two of the better defenses in the NFL and won. Then they held an explosive Dolphins offense to 20 pts. They looked good against the Chiefs but clearly lack talent to counter what the Chiefs are capable of doing. Crosby was injured and AP was forced to bench a vet CB. Still, no turnovers and no penalties.
Sure AP is not Andy Reid but he's learning on the fly, and working with a rookie OC whom he may or may not retain, should he be hired HC.
Lots of moving parts. Still five games to evaluate.
NY, they look good against the Chiefs after going up 14 nothing they were outscored 33 to 3 did you even watch the game. Sandy
I watched the game. Did you read the rest of my sentence?
There is almost nothing we can opine from the small sample we have, except for the obvious cohesion which AP has brought to the team. You see a change in HC as a foregone conclusion. As I said before, I hope you're not too disappointed.
To Raider Take,
Al Anon
I'm worried about all the rumors of new stake holders making big decisions on the Raiders future next year!
I don't understand why we fans think new stake holders know football better than MD does!
Remember?- it was a great idea if Al had retired before he passed away because the Raiders needed new directions and ideas and different culture? And it was Al ruining the team with old ideas and dysfunction?
We've had modern football people with new directions/ ways of running a team and we are worse off than before.
Now, we are supposed to expect business people and maybe ex-players to build a winning team and bring a different culture?
I thought owners were supposed to just let the football people run the team/ let the coaches coach?
Whats' the problem? you want to move on from the Davis era so badly that you want to be like all the other NFL teams?
If you think other people could build a winning team solely because they are famous ex-athletes or are billionaires then MD must be the worst of all owners and its' really easy to build a winning team. Most owners don't know football, MD doesn't- they just spend on front office people- isn't that what MD did tried to do?
Owners are supposed to spend on the best free agents or good ones to try and win- didn't MD do that? owners want good/ great coaches- did MD try to do that? owners will sometimes pick their own coaches like Cowboys' owner J. Jones hiring Jimmy Johnson- I heard MD allegedly hired some of our HCs'; sometimes owners will fire front office people- didn't MD do that?
The advisers got him some of the most inexperienced and mediocre of coaches, they didn't bring in star free agents, they didn't spend on their top free agents, they didn't draft top college stars and MD got most of the blame for what the front office people did.
MD was told to hire people and to manage the salary cap and the Raiders have been mediocre or bad for years because of it. It was his employees not MD that made the decisions, he didn't tell them not to spend on star free agents and to get rid of free agent vets. This team is not very good and you need to ask the advisers, his employees and ex-employees why they didn't spend more. They got control of Raiders and MD let them have it. So, saying a new stake holder is gonna do better is a little too much and since MD's employees all NEVER really tried to build an elite team with expensive stars then its' them and his advisers who you might want to question or put some of the heat/blame on about the Raiders' problems.
You say Al was running the team with old ideas and dysfunction like that's in question. He was! Al hired head coaches from the bottom of the barrel. No offense to any of those guys but it's true, they were all bottom tier head coaches.
Whether Mark Davis hires Pierce, Harbaugh or someone else, that person will be a superior to the string of head coaches Al hired, and almost on a yearly basis for his last 8-9 years.
IMO, Mark is trying his best. Pierce or Harbaugh, I will support either choice.
Lane Kiffin IS one of the best HCs' in college football!
Hue is a very good HC at Grambling State and BTW...an outstanding NFL OC too. What happened in Cleveland and Oakland wasn't his fault.
Norv Turner was a good HC and a top OC. He kicked our asses with S.D. for years.
Superior!?- coach Allen, Del Rio and the Pats' guys- really?
MD picking better than his father did(last nine years)?- ummmmm...dude!, most of these owners can't pick better than Al so I don't understand where you came up with that comment.
Bottom tier HCs' are now supposed to be decent-good coaches because of PARITY. So, if a genius like Al picked bottom tier-average coaches then it should've been good for the team. He had the roster and coaches could start winning fast. But for some reason it stopped working for the Raiders.
Why did these top tier HCs' stay away from Al? Was it that SOMEBODY TOLD them not to work for him? Why?
In your claims you say conspiracies about tampering are ridiculous even though I heard that SOMEBODY TOLD coach Peyton NOT to work for Al. That's a conspiracy!! that opens up questions about the whole 21 years of bad football! that says you're the ones living in the past not me! you can't even admit that the NFL is corrupt so you can feel like this team is finally part of the league and don't need to act like outcasts, rebels and be
Yea, that's what I thought, you just want to keep looking for your hero regime to take the team back to somewhere it once was but you don't want the old Raiders' culture to be part of that new era.
MD trying? No, he isn't He's doing what ADVISERS tell him! He's trying his best to be a good guy owner and not do like his father and try to make the Raiders the best team in the NFL. He's supposed to LET his front office run the team and not make many decisions.
He is an owner that hires people to run the team and not trying to be a 'meddling' or move making guy. He makes decisions about money and business deals not football and that's what the league wants its' owners to do. I mean, he could make football decisions like J. Jones but the league wants a good Raiders' owners that isn't firing, suing, over spending or complaining to media about the them.
You act like it was an accident that the Raiders hired and fired more head coaches than any team in the NFL.
It was no accident. Al's coaches were bottom of the pay scale. During the late period of his life, he got what he paid for, i.e., bad coaching. He would never hire and pay a quality HC whom he thought would expect any control of the team.
None of Al's head coaches were sought after, and he expected every one of them to toe the line. Kiffin was still a baby when Al hired him. Son of the great DC Monte Kiffin might have been the most talented and perhaps had the most potential but was fired "for cause" when Al realized young Lane had ideas and aspirations of his own.
Al mostly ran a puppet show. That worked when he was younger and more vibrant, but failed miserably after he traded Gruden, who got too much notoriety for Al's liking. Actually, it probably goes back to benching Marcus Allen!
Unfortunately, this is the sad truth. Not sure why you keep losing track of these events.
Obviously, Mark Davis hasn't done any better. My point was simply, he's had the courage to climb the pay scale of coaching talent. That doesn't mean he'd be guess right, but he's taking chances with some respected coaches, Del Rio, Gruden, McDaniels and, who knows, possibly Jim Harbaugh. None of these guys would make Al's list today.
You have a selective memory. That's okay. Al was great in his day, but he crashed and burned at the end and, unfortunately, that became part of his legacy.
To NY Raider,
Hired and fired? Al hired guys because they were decent-outstanding HCs' he fired them because strange things and losing kept happening!
If the Raiders were rebuilding and were truly a bad football team trying to get back to 'glory' then he wouldn't been so hard on his HCs' and gave them more time but the fact was the team was loaded with talent in fact, top five talent over that nine year period so the HCs' didn't have many excuses for losing.
Now, there are a ton of excuses for losing, the team doesn't have a genius running it anymore.
Al was outstanding from '03-'11: he gave his coaches more than enough to win.
This is what gets me about you:
Jim Harbaugh
Jon Gruden
Bill Musgrave
David Shaw
All worked for Al yet, you want them to be your HCs'. If Al was so bad at hiring coaches why do you want these guys? I understand a guy may be really good but didn't get hired but they worked for Al during or just before that slump. If he had a staff like this then its' hard to see a team being this bad just off the assistants' talent.
But the Raiders lost and it just doesn't make sense. Yes, it was tampering and revenge that caused the losing not him. The same none sense that you support MD with is the same silliness that makes your claims seem silly.
Al did the best he could, spending on top free agents, and he hired decent-good coaches. That's more than ANY of the new regimes have done. Now, what sense does it make to say Well, he lost his touch and the Raiders lost because of bad decisions and dysfunction for nine years until he passed?' one of the best GMs of all-time? Now, if MD tried and brought in superior coaches that lose, doesn't it seem strange that a legend can try bringing in some of the best free agents, decent draft picks and some of the best assistants in the league all together but keep on losing? when you have talent and coaching or assistant like that it doesn't make sense to be losing for nine years.
MD is a guy who owns a team! he just wants to get along with the league! Al, good in his day? Al was still a genius and helping the league before he passed. But Raidernation started listening to the NFL/ media and that's why they are still looking for that hero regime that will build a winning team.
You really shouldn't try to put down on Al but look at your own thinking when it comes to a good front office.
"They were all great head coaches but strange things and losing kept happening that caused them to get fired."
Seriously?! Were you laughing when you wrote that?
Geez, where did I say I wanted anyone to be HC? Except maybe that I'm rooting for Pierce to do well. Please don't make up stuff you think I said. I have been very critical of Gruden 2, and I never said a single word about David Shaw. And I never even hinted about Musgrave being head coach, only that once upon a time he was a good OC. Jim Harbaugh's resume speaks for itself, and none of it was known when he worked for Al. He was QB coach during Bill Calahan's epic failure. Al never hired him to be HC, so why should I give Al credit for that?
Your words and interpretations are make-believe. You conflate eras without context.
As for my criticisms of Al's final years and/or the Raiders front office, they deserve every bit of it. Win and it's all forgiven. But they can't do that! Failure has become part of their DNA.
And you, my friend, have a strange devotion to failure. You embrace it like winning.
Hey, what about this new stake holder thing?
Why would MD want to bring in so many stake holders that he might end up being a fan and keeping a small stake that lets him get seat in the board room and a visitors' pass to the bathroom and free tickets to the game.
Al Davis didn't do all this work to lose his team to new stake holders!
For the last eleven to twelve years fans have waited for a return to 'glory'. No matter how bad these new regimes were they still supported them.
Al was one of the best scouts ever when he joined the LACs' in the 60s'. He wasn't a game manager. He worked at USC and was one of college football's best recruiters and assistants in the 50s'. He was one of the Chargers' top assistants under coach Sid Gillman. He signed some of the best players in NFL/ AFL history. He was later hired by the Raiders and built one of the best franchises in pro sports.
Now, which kind of owner/ GM do you think could win for the Raiders? A guy like Al or some billionaire that will hire football men? A guy like Al knows how to build a team he was a scout and coach, a new owner would hire football men and try to find a way to get some of the best players. MD can be a normal owner. We need a guy like Al.
Where did you read Mark Davis was relinquishing control of the Raiders? You didn't!
An entire generation of Raiders fans only know them as losers, so many fans would like Mark Davis to sell, but that's not what he's doing and you know that.
The value of the team has reached $6.5 billion according to Forbes. Looks like Davis wants to cash out a little. Perhaps the most obvious reason is to protect himself (in the event Carol dies) by staying liquid. Maybe he needs money to buyout coaches and players contracts which he keeps getting stuck with..., perhaps a reserve to hire Jim Harbaugh, or some extra coin to improve his lavish lifestyle.
I was near some A's fans who had a Raiders' L.V. blog and anti-A's moving section and in the comments section somebody told about the Raiders being on the verge of having a shake up and fans didn't understand it could be some celebrities/ business partners and some big LV entertainment companies involved.
I was in a store area and happened to see the A's fans talking I'll get more info because I remembered the site and the blogger has a friend who is a Raiders' fan on the blog too.
You heard it from an A's fan reading a Raiders blog? Is it possible they were reading one of your posts?
How come the Chefs look very beatable this year...except when they play the Raiders ?
Why is lover boy Kelce very stoppable this year...except against the Raiders ?
Raiders roster has to have some of the worst players ever to step on a football field. This is the residue of so many bad draft picks throughout the years.
It's also the result of scorched earth deconstruction at every coaching change, despite the promise to advance the cause.
Too many cooks in the kitchen! Harbaugh is potentially the next demolition expert to what's become a long-standing crime scene.
Media headline:
Bruce Irvin knew from experience with Raiders that Derek Carr would get “rattled”
To NY Raider,
It may be just a rumor by some NFL fans upset with L.V. getting another cities' sports team.
The A's may leave Oakland and some Raiders' fans were probably reading this blog and posted to the guys friend who is a guest writer on that blog and a Raiders' fan.
We don't know how this guy got his info but I do not see why you always want to put pro sport into that honest, squeaky clean or white and black with no other sides attitude.
They may do some corrupt things but they'd wouldn't do anything really criminal or corrupt.
The guy didn't post everything about his information but one thing is true somebody is trying to get pro teams to Las Vegas and they don't care if cities lose their pro teams to L.V.
They are trying to make a lot of money off L.V.
Hey, if this guy is making this up then we can let it go and I'll give you credit. But he didn't make up the fact that the league is trying to turn this team into a money maker and they really like that 'brand' and, a lot of people are circling trying to buy a stake in the team.
He said one of the groups are celebrities and business partners are trying to get a stake in the team and they have some really big time stars and business/ entertainment people. The other group are wealthy business people and big L.V. corporations- they're circling the Raiders and want a stake I don't know if its' true but they claim to only want to be partners but might want to own a huge stake and have a lot of say in the team.
The NFL won't leave MD alone and they may be trying to get him to offer these groups a stake.
Again, please resist putting words into my mouth. Nothing squeaky clean about the NFL. Never suggested there was. My central point with you is that the NFL is not the reason the Raiders have been the NFL's biggest losers for 20 years, and still counting.
Bill Parcels once said, "you are what your record says you are."
That's exactly who the Raiders are.
I'd say, get used to it, but we are so far past that. Fans now expect to lose and, sadly, some are devoted to losing. Is that where you're at, because you seem pretty committed to your NFL conspiracies that the Raiders can never overcome.
Ghost, I agree there are some subpar players on the Raiders but I actually think the roster is not terrible. I think with the right coach, a couple of key FA acquistions there is the potential to be competitive soon similar to the rams this yare ou QB question pending.
Let me lis thte solid players. Amik, Hobbs, Moehrig, Crosby, Koonce, Spillane, Deablo. That is 7 on D with Crosby a superstar and Hobbs and Spillane above average. Offense JAcobs, Davante, Renfrow, Meyers, Miller are all stars or above average.
Sign a DT and OL in FA, have a decent draft and figure out QB they can compete for the playoffs
Sandy
Sandy, those players won't all survive the roster next year even if Mark Davis keeps AP. If Harbaugh is hired, he will blow up the roster. We've seen this play out many times. Even when we're told they plan to keep pieces in place, they don't.
Honestly, I'm a little surprised at your list. You've criticized me for propping up marginal players. Robertson? Moehrig? Koonce? Deablo? These guys are hanging by a thread for next year.
Harbaugh will go scorched earth on the Raiders roster. That should be your wish, i.e., Harbaugh trading for draft picks then using his vast college scouting knowledge to rebuild the roster through the draft.
There are the two paths I see for Davis. Retain AP and build on what's there, or hire Harbaugh and blow it up, again.
The Raiders need more than a few good players Ghost, they need a whole list of defensive players.
Notice how the Raiders have seemed to work hard to not sign any super star free agent. Now, if they are trying to copy the dynasty Patriots(Bellichick), Steelers' and Packers' programs they messed up badly!
Didn't it make them think when Reggie wasn't able to do it? Didn't fans wonder if it wasn't just the players but maybe they couldn't find coaches who could prepare and motivate players like Bellichick? man, to think that Al's way with size, athleticism and speed with big spending on star players ruined the Raiders but being cheap, coaching like Bellichick without the talent or him and not looking for top coaches and giving them talent would win and turn us into a good football team has been a lot of big promises of a silver/gold "new era" of winning but being disappointed with mediocrity, a hateful league and promises from NFL/ media selling us bad products built by over hyped, mismanaged and mediocre new regimes to a fan base desperate to win again.
We keep supporting advisers to MD, NFL/ owners thinking because the NFL is so successful they should know football. What we got was a money scheme and hateful football people who keep making up excuses and mediocre Raiders' teams and we just keep supporting them.
We have a standard of loyalty and thought the powerful NFL could advise MD and help build a team. But we didn't think that money and corporate partners was what they were worried about not making us winners. The NFL hated Al and they aren't really doing much to help build the team. MD is wealthy the Raiders are getting offers to buy a stake in it so they are already getting wealthier but we keep seeing the team lose. We need to ask them why don't they focus on football instead of money.
You say its' just bad decisions and mistakes. Maybe its' the NFL hating on us and owners hating/ pressuring MD to work with them? But to keep supporting this silliness is just plain too much.
Al Anon, Geez, I don't understand why you keep getting this wrong!
The Pats guys signed a ton of expensive free agents and re-loaded Raiders contracts! They spent a ton of money!
They signed Davante Adams!
They signed Maxx Crosby!
They signed Derek Carr!
They Signed Jakobi Meyers!
They signed Darrin Waller!
They signed Jimmy Garoppolo!
They signed Hunter Renfrow (then benched him!)
They signed Chandler Jones!
You know this but you keep saying they didn't spend money.
Raiders are regularly among the most active off-season teams, largely due to all the coaching turnover.
https://hwsathletics.com/sports/football/roster/tyre-coleman/4913
the Raiders signed some very good free agents and UDFAs':
Shelby Harris/ DT Denver and Seattle.
D. Autry
N. Agholor
A. Bars
M. Peters
M. Crabtree
J. Nelson
K. Burnett
But they NEVER signed or SPENT on star free agetns!
D. Revis
J. Clowney
A. Talib
J.J. Watt
They spent a lot of money on Carr and others only to let them go! They did it because they don't know what to do with the team yet but they don't really want it to succeed until they do! That's why they refuse to sign star free agents! They didn't guarantee all of that money to those players but they refused to go for the elite and pro bowlers in free agency! its' like they knew these were good players but not the dominating/ elite ones in free agency that might get a team moving quicker.
How good does a player need to be to qualify as a "star" in your mind?
Davante Adams is one of the biggest STAR acquisitions in Raiders history! His contract is $141.25M with $67.5 guaranteed. Adams will likely be a first ballot hall of famer.
And if you're extending your "RAIDERS NEVER SPEND" statement to Raiders history, as it appears you are, then you have clearly forgotten a long list of star free agents like Jerry Rice, Trent Brown, Roger Craig, Eric Dickerson, Lyle Alzado, Warren Sapp, and so many others. That list is too long to compile.
So how far away are the Raiders ?
What if I could take just two NFL players and put them on the Raiders right now. Lets say CJ Stroud was the Qb, and Micah Parsons was our Lb/edge rusher.
Do you think the Raiders would be a playoff team ? I do. Maybe not a super bowl team yet, but close. So two great players, at key positions, can make a big difference between being a loser, or a winner.
Raiders gotta stop drafting bums, and find winners.
BTW, to me the entire secondary must be replaced. Too many open receivers all over the field all the time. Gotta start over there.
I'd take Stroud and Parsons for sure. But, IMO, it's much more than just the players. There needs to be a competent and reliable Braintrust. Without going to the list, the Raiders have clearly lacked that element.
As for the players, IMO, it starts in the trenches. This is where the Raiders are at their weakest, especially, on defense. Which begs the question, what the hell have they been doing?
The defense has been better since McDaniels left, which is a bit puzzling since Graham is still coaching it. If I were to guess, I'd say Pierce has motivated players and may have given Graham a new directive to be more aggressive.
Facyson comes back this week. That might help. Peters was lazy. He mostly sat back in soft coverage and looked for a big play, whiffing on tackles. Glad he's gone!
To NY Raider,
Noooooooo! I didn't say the Raiders NEVER spend on star free agents! I said the "new era" Raiders('12-present) NEVER spend on star free agents! You know I'm not talking about Al's era! Its' these new teams! You say they spend money, no, they are screwing MD and playing games with us. Most of that is over hyped stories and most of those contracts weren't guaranteed, only a few of those guys got that money.
The players the Raider spend big on weren't the kind of star players that are pro bowl dominating kind. They did the same thing you attacked Al for when they traded for D. Adams they then let his QB walk and bring in an injury prone QB. They also, signed guys but didn't build around them.
The Raiders were at the bottom and the worst team in the league with a program that the media/ NFL sold the fans who where desperate for a winner. They didn't do much to build around the talent they had but instead let good players go before they had to pay them and made bad trades and refused to spend on super star free agent players. They were very stingy with the salary cap and signed cheap talent and didn't try to get assistants that could coach the talent up.
They tell us its' just finding the right regime but maybe they aren't worried about winning. They are making the new Raiders into a model franchise and want new stake holder for them and they aren't yet ready to see the team win, they will keep us waiting until they get their Raiders' team they want.
Your words, not mine....
"But they NEVER signed or SPENT on star free agents!"
Even if you deny saying it (4 posts above), how can you dismiss $141 million for Adams, or even $12 million for Jacobs?
How many STAR free agents did Al sign from 2003 to 2011 that got us to the playoffs?
NY Raider,
Al's guys were already pro bowlers and some of the best players in the NFL. They came to a team that had outstanding coaches/ assistants a history, culture and a genius running it.
They didn't come to a team without talent and good coaches, and they knew how to play football.
What happened is ? you or me can't explain why the team suddenly lost! what you says makes sense ONLY because of the losses but it just doesn't look like a losing front office with all of those guys.
Its' hard to believe they could have three losing seasons over a nine year period much less all nine. With that kind of staff and Al its shocking and hard to believe. They lost to teams that were mediocre and some bad. You talk about "Megatron" in Detroit but how many times did they get to the super bowl with him and Suh? In a PARITY league were you can win with average talent you still want to put down on Al and claim he ruined this team. I don't think so, I think it was tampering that ruined this team because a team that just lost a Super Bowl should have talent to win after maybe a two year slump.
You say this stuff with strong evidence to the contrary. Unfortunately, just saying it doesn't it make it so. All the pro bowl players, great coaches and genius of Al Davis went into hiding in the mid-to late-90s. Then when it looked like he put it all back to together, Davis blew it up by trading arguably the hottest young head coach in the NFL.
Following the SB, that wasn't a "slump". It was a sustained period of poor management, bad coaching and underachieving results.
"You are what your record says you are." Bill Parcels!
You can't change facts.
No you aren't, that's one of the biggest myths in pro sports today. It used to be that way when teams had to play to win. Now!?- these owners can make huge profits just off the business deals, stadium and t.v. money they get.
There is little pressure to win only look like you are trying. T
The ideas that you have are not that far off its' just that you seem to be quick to make it a one sided issue instead of looking hard at both sides its' like there is no corruption and it CAN'T get out of control because there are laws or corporations(NFL) wouldn't go that far(?).
Guys like Al shouldn't be losing like that it just doesn't make ANY sense. Then, mediocrity in the league just goes on winning- upsets
You mean you don't think the Raiders shouldn't have won a big game, upset a few teams and made the playoffs over a nine year period?
Yea, you ONLY have wins and loses but a team that LOOKED decent because doubt if an Al team has EVER gotten to be the worse in football maybe mediocre in the bottom 5-10 teams in the NFL but NEVER the worse. Yea, they looked very decent in fact playoff level- IMO.
No NY, you records doesn't give us a true idea of you team anymore! mediocrity can win in a PARITY league so I know Al's teams were above average so they had a good chance to win.
You want to support the NFL fine but something more than Al ruined the Raiders.
Where did I support the NFL? Because I don't buy into your conspiracy theories that the NFL ruined the Raiders for the past 20 years?
And I'm going to take your word for it over Bill Parcels?
Please!
You aren't what your records says you are anymore!!! That's not hard to prove.
With the none sense that pro sports teams sell to fans its' hard to believe that they actually buy these over charging, over rated and money motivated schemes these leagues come up with.
They try to sell PARITY and model franchise systems but what you get is just mediocrity that is supposed to have built teams that can upset truly elite teams through being cheap and coaching up above average players.
Then they over charge for mediocre games that are close and have all kinds of terrible new rules and bad play calling.
tion when it comes to taking somebody's word over the other and going along with the win/ lose evidence:
Al is one of the people who started pro teams' "Franchise free agency" where pro teams can hold out with cities for the best offer for a new stadium he is the person most credited with making it work. But he also got far more criticism for moving than the others - Rams', Cowboys and Dolphins' owners moved their teams and started the fad first.
He built outstanding teams and when you say oh, the Raiders were unfairly penalized for years why do you say that but you can't believe the bias and hate is far worse than that?
If the Raiders started losing because they went through usual things losing players/ bad decisions- fine. But becoming the NFL's worst team after being the AFC's best over one year and I mean were loaded- How can the '03-'11 Raiders have been worse than the usual bad teams and barely able to defeat any of them?
What did Al do?
QB: they only had to hand the ball off and had some of the best receivers in the league. If they were game managers and back ups they were surrounded by enough talent to win.
defense: really?- the new regimes can't even build a decent unit but you have the audacity to put down on Al? He had guys like C-Wood, T. Armstrong. D. Burgess and T. Kelly. The linebackers were good players and he and he had at last three pro bowl DBs' over that period.
None of the new regimes had that much talent and many of the teams the Raiders couldn't beat had that kind of talent.
No, a team like that doesn't just lose and not have one winning season. And if you knew the league was upset with him and if you knew he was stressing them more by helping the NFLPA and the players then you can see something isn't right and its' not close to being all of Al's fault.
You can use the win/ loss thing but I see corruption and maybe you should start questioning your NFL's system.
Raiders' All-Stars vs. Vikings' Legends
F. Tarkanton
A. Petersen
C. Foreman
S. Jordan
R. Moss #4 A. Carter
A. Rashad #3 A. Theiman
R. Yary
R. McDaniel
M. Tinglehoff
E. White
G. Zimmerman
G. Anderson (kicker)
KR A. Carter
PR C. Patterson
J. Marshall
A. Page
J. Randall (3-4 NG)
J. Allen
E. Kendricks C. Greenway(3-4 ILB)
J. Siemon
M. Blair
B.Bryant N. Wright #4
A. Winfield X. Rhodes #3
P. Krauss
J. Browner
G. Coleman (punter)
R. Gannon
B. Jackson
M. Van Eagan
D. Waller
J. Rice C. Branch #4
F. Biletnikoff J. Lofton #3
A. Shell
S. Wisnewski
D. Mosebar
W. Hawkins
R. Mix
C. Bass (kicker)
KR J. Ford
PR B. Joe Edmonds
H. Long
A. Thoms
C. McGlocktin (3-4 NG)
D. Burgess
T. Hendricks
M. Millen J. Robinson(3-4 OLB)
O. Wilson
R. Woodson N. Wilson #4
W. Brown E. Allen #3
R. Lott
M. Davis
R. Guy
You're as good as your record! Seems pretty obvious, and pretty simple.
The instant wins no longer matter, the NFL is finished as a business.
Your bar is low. In your world, losing is winning. I'm not sure how you square that in sports or in business.
I can assure you, not many fans hold your belief.
I don't believe one system, one idea is so awesome that teams want to give up their own systems.
The Patriot way was awesome it wasn't new, but it was remade into a dynasty. But that doesn't make it so dominating and successful that other systems don't work anymore. There are a lot of teams that have won using their own systems.
What I do see about the Patriot way that it works well with the NFL's/ owner's ideas of a model franchise by managing the salary cap, bringing in high character guys, looking for players to play hard for less money, and unlike the new Raiders- bringing in star free agents but for less money.
That's the NFL/ Patriot way and Al didn't want anything to do with it.
The 49ers' "West Coast" offense is as good as Bellichick's ideas.
Pittsburgh has ideas about high character and managing the salary cap but they will sign some top free agents and will put up with attitudes for awhile but they won't put up with guys asking for too much money and they have and outstanding front office.
Dallas like the Raiders they have elite talent and some of the best assistants in football and they love star players.
With Al it was a sudden slump that made being very good-elite mean nothing. It made playing in SB a year before mean nothing. It said any given Sunday except with the Raiders and everybody/ anybody could beat them.
It didn't matter who he bought in or who was coaching them anybody could beat them. When good teams get bad you can see the reasons but with Al they just lost and saying it was bad decisions, losing players just don't make sense when we know Al hardly EVER let that bother him before. But for some strange reason, the Raiders can't make the playoffs or have one winning season for nine years.
It wasn't just losing Gruden and BTW....what was the problem with Gruden II? Yea, you can't really attack that can you? The Raiders kept on losing with him back.
You see, you can't say for sure it was Al or his roster. True, a super bowl team can get bad but the good ones rebuild in a 1-3 years. Even a one year wonder that usually loses can get bad again and then when once in awhile so why is it Al SUDDENLY couldn't?
No NFL team loses for nine years straight. And no team with that kind of GM/ owner and talent loses for years.
Al Davis built a good team and had more than enough talent during the slump to win if they were that bad you wouldn't have to claim just how bad they were when they weren't. It takes a lot to win but it takes a lot to get that bad and I don't think Al's Raiders EVER got that bad without a good reason. The Raiders had a reason why they were losing and it wasn't Al.
Post a Comment
<< Home