Jump to content

Mr Raider

Veteran Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

93 Starter


  • NFL Team
  • MLB Team
  • College Team
    Georgia Bulldogs

Other Information

  • Location
  • Job
  • Xbox/PSN/Steam/Other
    XBox- MrRaider1991
  1. 2020 NFL Draft Thread

    Yeah but even the Ravens initially wanted to sit Jackson the entire year. They were adamant that he would sit, and Flacco got injured so that could have legitimately changed their plans. My main point is that in today's NFL most guys are thrown in their rookie year at some point. Whether its by injury or pressure from outside influences. Gruden does have a long leash in terms of his contract length, but he's also gone 2 years of sub .500 play. Even with the ten year deal if he gets to 3 or 4 years without the playoffs/winning record he'll end up on the hot seat. So what are the odds he drafts a guy he legitimately thinks has to sit for a year before starting and then year 4 will be the first starting experience with a guy and wins will be the expected result regardless. My point is I think there's a better chance Gruden trades up for Tua or Herbert than of him taking someone so raw like Love in this particular draft. Because Love does need to sit a year IMO, and if you aren't going to feel confident in a guys ability to play year one, in a league where it's becoming the new norm for guys to play early and find success I'm not sure that's the right pick/direction. Now if he thinks Love or Eason (or whoever) is a franchise caliber QB able to play early if the season starts off rocky, the incumbent gets injured, or he can simply beat out whoever else is in the QB room than by all means. My main point is guys rarely get a full season to sit anymore. Even when that is supposed to be the plan. So I don't think taking a guy in the first that you think NEEDS to sit to find success long term is the wisest move in the current NFL.
  2. 2020 NFL Draft Thread

    I was talking about this with a buddy earlier... And we were on the subject of drafting a guy like Jordan Love or Eason in the first or high second round, and it got me thinking... Particularly for the people that don't believe Carr should even be the starter next season, but in general too... If the idea is to use a high, valuable pick on a QB and sit him for a year (people that say two are dreaming, but more on why that is with the rest of this comment), how often does that ever actually happen in the recent history of the NFL? Back 10-15 years ago, sure, it was common to draft a guy, even in the first and sit them for a year or two to develop, but in the modern NFL how many guys are there? Mahomes and Aaron Rodgers are the only guys I could think of. And both of those situations are different than the situation we currently have IMO. Andy Reid is viewed as one of the elite coaches in the NFL, and has the QB whisperer label, he also had Alex Smith and had been in the playoffs every year prior to that. He was going to be given the time and benefit of the doubt to develop a guy for a year. Rodgers was behind a first ballot HOFer and iron man that they literally offered to pay 20 million dollars to stay retired so they could move to Rodgers after 3+ years of him sitting on the pine. They also had a history of playoff appearances under the coach and incumbent QB. Every year guys are drafted in the first and the coaching staff says were not going to rush him into action, he's going to sit and learn this year, and almost every year those guys are thrown into the fire, whether it be because the QB play, the season is essentially over, pressure from the fan base/management/ownership... It happened with Bortles, Jackson, Josh Allen, Baker Mayfield, hell even Carr himself. It's almost every QB drafted early. So I'm of the opinion if you really think a giy NEEDS a year on the bench before he's ready to contribute and see the field he absolutely should not be taken in the first round for sure, and possibly not even the early second. I guess one could argue Gruden with his 10 year deal and power inside the front office would give him the ability to commit to sitting a guy for a year (a first round pick just isnt sitting for two years period anymore), but I still don't think I agree with that. This will be year 3, in a new market, new stadium, the pressure to put in the first round pick would be immense in our current situation, especially if DC stumbles even slightly. I guess I'm looking for opinions on whether people agree with my assessment or not. And if they do than why guys like Eason/Love would be legitimate options for us with either first round pick. I simply don't think in the current landscape you can afford to draft a guy in the first round if you think playing him in the first year will hurt his development or that he just can't be good enough to get on the field, especially on a team that's talented enough to be a .500 team he's coming into.
  3. If the board falls like this its Ceedee Lamb all day. Henry Ruggs if you have him as a superior prospect (I disagree with that), but either one is good value at a position of severe need.
  4. Tom Brady to the Raiders?

    I wouldn't mind it on a 1 or 2 year deal. Obviously you can't give him some long term deal. But if we can land one of the top wideouts (Lamb, Higgins, Jeudy) it would be the best overall offense Brady has had in a long time. Use the rest of our free agent resources on the defensive side of the ball and invest the rest of our draft picks on defense and depth (and hopefully a QB to groom under Brady for that year or two), ir wouldn't be the worst plan in the world. I don't think Brady is done, I don't think hes the Brady of old either. But with Jacobs, Waller, Renfrow, a top 10 OL, and hopefully an improved defense he could certainly do enough to make a deep push.
  5. 2020 NFL Draft Thread

    I'm personally very interested in Fromm and Hurts. I'd prefer both guys to love and Eason if you assume Eason and Love are going to be anywhere near the first round because I think you'll be able to get Fromm or Hurts in the second (I don't think either fall to the third though). We have the ammo to move up into the second to get one of them. Both of them are super experienced with a lot of college starts (a must for me when looking for a QB of the future. They both have played in a lot of big games. Leaders. I think both guys have shown the ability to be accurate in the short and intermediate stuff. Neither has a cannon, but both possess good enough arm strength Imo. Fromm works through his progressions really well. And manages the game at a high level (that isnt a knock for me). Hurts improved a lot in terms of going through progressions this season. I'm actually higher on Herbert than most seem to be. But Burrow, Tua, and Herbert are the only guys I would personally take in the first. After that I stay away from Eason because he doesn't have a ton of college experience and I don't think he's very accurate, which are 2 of my biggest indicators for success at the NFL level when evaluating. Love is turnover prone and rarely works through progression at all. Both have the physical tools but haven't shown the more intricate aspects to QB play. You're betting on arm strength and athleticism, and while those are nice, both of those things are the traits that lead to a lot more busts than success IMO. Some people like those types of QB prospects because the upside is huge, the floor is also extremely low.
  6. New Derek Carr thread

    All I'll say is as a former frequent poster (and now primarily a lurker) the Carr debate is a huge reason why... Every thread seems to devolve into the same discussion, by the same posters, saying the same things, and eventually turning towards more personal attack. It's an important discussion for the Raider nation... I definitely get that. But I think it'd be great if we could keep them to Carr threads, and stop the smugness on both sides when discussing the topic.
  7. 2020 NFL Draft Thread

    That's who I see as well. I don't want any part of him in the first round. I take CeeDee if he's there at 12, otherwise I look at Higgins at 19. I have them as the best two in the class. I like Jeudy and Ruggs, but I have them behind Lamb and Higgins (I know most have him behind those 2, but I see some super striking similarities to AJ Green). If Higgins runs a 4.45-4.50 he might even be in contention for pick 12. He's super talented and productive. Great hands, great size, good enough speed, great in the redzone and in jump balls. I think his ceiling is as high as anyone in the class. Though I still think Lamb is the cream of the crop of this WR class.
  8. 2020 NFL Draft Thread

    Is that for sure the case though? In the recent past we have seen guys like Mahomes, Watson, Jimmy G, Lamar Jackson, Russell Wilson, Dak, Tannehill, Bridgewater go in that 10-12 range where we currently sit to the second or third round in some cases... I'm not sure its as cut and dry that those true franchise guys are only found in the top 5 anymore like it was a decade or go. Sure there are still some examples of those guys obviously, but there are a number of guys that are franchise, and even MVP caliber guys in the range we're at now that it might make sense to stay put and take a guy there, or even trade down and acquire picks and target a guy we think has long term ability to be the next one of those guys and let them sit for a year behind Carr... I still think Carr can be the guy, but I'm no longer against taking a QB that Gruden and Mayock think gives us the ability at elite QB play, but I still don't think trading up is the right play. Edit - I think what's even more important than the draft position where you get these guys is putting them in the best position to succeed. A lot of guys drafted outside of the top 5 weren't neccesarily considered the blue chip, can't miss prospects those top 5 picks were but went on to have more success and better careers because they went to a more stable situation where they could sit and develop for a stretch, or stepped into a team that had a better supporting cast around them from their teammates to coaches. I think there's a chance with our current foundation, free agent money, and other draft picks that we could take a guy that falls to 12 or even in the second round (say a Herbert, Hurts, Love, or Fromm) and they have more success than Tua... Not because they're better talents, but because we have built a better, more stable situation where they wouldn't have to be rushed onto the field week 1 if they weren't ready, and because they have better talent and coaching around them than Tua or ends up going higher and into a worse situation overall (injury concerns to boot), and the extra ammo needed to trade up for him could play a factor in that better situation.
  9. Raiders Defense

    I agree. I think we have seen enough from the rookies and Mayowa to bring him back and role with them as our top 3 for next season. Key can battle it out with another veteran and look in the middle rounds for a guy with high upside. I think we've seen enough to have those guys be our starters at edge to the point where we likely wont invest in a DE in the first. DT is a different story IMO. But our starters at DE are set for at least another season with what we have seen out of the young guys, assuming they continue to play well and improve down the stretch which I expect.
  10. How are those rookies doing?

    I disagree... But I'm not going to go on a rant talking about all of these guys being all world after 10 games. It's just as fair as writing them off as just some guys after the same sample size when almost the entire draft class is playing a pretty consistent role, if not starters. I think Ferrell, Crosby, and Mullen all have a chance to be good to very good starters, Jacobs has the ability to be all pro caliber IMO, Renfrow and Moreau have the chance to be high end second receiver/TE. Not going to crown any of them yet, but the early returns are more promising than how you're portraying them.
  11. How are those rookies doing?

    Except for the sacks, receptions (Jacobs has 17, Renfrow has double that, you also have Moreau with the same as Jacobs, and 7 combined for Ingold and Doss), and scrimmage TDs (which Jacobs plays a big part in with 7 but you also have Renfrow, Moreau, and Ingold with 7 combined). Jacobs is a huge part of that no doubt, but it's somewhat foolish to act like all of those numbers are only because of Jacob's success. They aren't. And even if they are that means Jacobs is out-producing other teams entire rookie class in all of those areas. That would still be highly impressive, and it's not the case, nor do I imagine it's typically to see a team lead the NFL in all those areas in a season with one super productive rookie.
  12. Around The League V.2

    Hey, I'm a Khalil Mack fan, I thought moving him was probably the right move, but it still sucked. Hicks being out hurts, I'm not saying it isnt a factor, I just don't know that's the main factor. Mostly because of the lack of effort. Which was never really seen in Oakland. And I'm sure its disheartening to play on a team with such a bad offense, and I get teams are focusing on him, but the latter has always been the case. Even take Hicks away thats the second most talent he's played with his entire career defensively. The most talented being last year. He was constantly doubled in Oakland. He didn't have anyone else to really take pressure off of him here either. And at the very least he gave good effort game in and game out. I'm not writing him off. I'd wager he'll turn it around, but the lack of effort comments do give me a little pause because that's so out of character. Put that with a guy that reportedly wouldn't even meet with Gruden being the final straw to pull the trigger on the trade, and it seems at least plausible that Mack has become SLIGHTLY more complacent getting his mega deal. Last year wasn't the case, but he also was feeding off a team winning a lot of games and using the trade as motivation.
  13. Around The League V.2

    That's what it seems like to me as well. I'm not going to sit here and say that I've went over every game extensively, but the games I've seen I haven't even noticed him. I don't buy Hicks being out as the main culprit either. It's not like Mack had a dominant player on the line next to him here to open things up. Even outside of sack numbers you would notice Mack making plays and effecting the game. I haven't been seeing that. I'm not rooting against him, but if this type of play continues we dodged a huge bullet not paying him.
  14. Around The League V.2

    Khalil Mack has been invisible the last three Bears games I've watched. Like not even getting pressure, not just the sack numbers. What gives?
  15. Pick is in, #106 - DE Maxx Crosby

    That was one of the most dominant performances I have ever seen from a rookie on the defensive side of the ball. I'm not going to overreact too much because the Bengals OL is bad, but he was living in the backfield. Maxx has been on fire since the Bears game. And the scary thing is he's still learning and still has a lot of room to improve to reach his ceiling.