State of our team

[G]

Most on the team have given up. I still believe in Carr but I want him traded because we don't deserve to keep anybody pre-Gruden. Blow it all up. KABOOM!!!

[MrOaktown_56]

21 minutes ago, SilverNBlackFan said:

He made some nice improv plays against the colts that surprised me, but it's just not his game or who he is. He is 5 years in and he is what he is. Watching Carr run around looks super awkward and and unnatural. He will never be that guy to extend a play or make many off scheduled throws.

And his pocket movement skills are trash. Even the statues like Phillip Rivers, Brady can move around in a muddied pocket to get a throw off. Carr curls up in a fetal position, its embarrassing. 

1

 I sometimes wonder if we watch the same game.

Also, comparing him to Brady isn't really a good way to establish that Carr isn't a good qb.

[SilverNBlackFan]

45 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

 I sometimes wonder if we watch the same game.

Also, comparing him to Brady isn't really a good way to establish that Carr isn't a good qb.

Well then, watch Baker Mayfield, watch Wentz, Watson, Mahomes - take your pick of QBs younger then Carr. They all operate and maneuver in a muddied pocket far better than Carr.

It was a knock on Carr in college and it is true today.

[MrOaktown_56]

8 minutes ago, SilverNBlackFan said:

Well then, watch Baker Mayfield, watch Wentz, Watson, Mahomes - take your pick of QBs younger then Carr. They all operate and maneuver in a muddied pocket far better than Carr.

It was a knock on Carr in college and it is true today.

Wentz, Watson, and Mahomes have barely played games... chill. All 3 can be excellent players. Mayfield isn't as good as Carr right now straight up. All except mayfield are on far better teams, but if it makes you happy, then sure. Carr actually has showed improvement in this area, but yes tell us how his inability to operate in the pocket is why we lost yesterday .

[BayRaider]

22 minutes ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

Wentz, Watson, and Mahomes have barely played games... chill. All 3 can be excellent players. Mayfield isn't as good as Carr right now straight up. All except mayfield are on far better teams, but if it makes you happy, then sure. Carr actually has showed improvement in this area, but yes tell us how his inability to operate in the pocket is why we lost yesterday .

Far better teams? Watsons Texans are on pace for the worst pass protection ever, pressured 45% of the time, but he has great pocket presence. Wentz has a very average offense. Honestlu put Wentz in that 2016 Raider Offense and you will see records broken. Wentz is a much better QB  than Derek Carr. 

[CerealKiller]

1 hour ago, SilverNBlackFan said:

He made some nice improv plays against the colts that surprised me, but it's just not his game or who he is. He is 5 years in and he is what he is. Watching Carr run around looks super awkward and and unnatural. He will never be that guy to extend a play or make many off scheduled throws.

And his pocket movement skills are trash. Even the statues like Phillip Rivers, Brady can move around in a muddied pocket to get a throw off. Carr curls up in a fetal position, its embarrassing. 

Brady and Rivers have protection. No one not named Russell Wilson could survive under this kind of pressure. Carr has had his share of bad games regardless of pressure, but you can't say he is the problem.

[MrOaktown_56]

1 hour ago, CerealKiller said:

Brady and Rivers have protection. No one not named Russell Wilson could survive under this kind of pressure. Carr has had his share of bad games regardless of pressure, but you can't say he is the problem.

 

Shhh. Don't tell the truth. It's easier to blame carr.

[drfrey13]

The fact is we have bad play from every level of the team.  There are to many moving parts so it looks like one big chicken or the egg argument.  One fact remains though.  We had one player that no matter who he had around him would produce at a high level and we got rid of him.  Everyone else seems to be dependent on having players better than themselves around in order to produce.  It does not mean everyone is trash.  Just that we will not win until we get some high end talent and/or the team learns how to play as a team.  This includes Carr.

[SilverNBlackFan]

7 hours ago, CerealKiller said:

Brady and Rivers have protection. No one not named Russell Wilson could survive under this kind of pressure. Carr has had his share of bad games regardless of pressure, but you can't say he is the problem.

Brady and Rivers are statues but move around in the pocket far better than Carr, who is decently athletic, was my point. Carr just doesn't have that innate ability. He looks like a deer in headlights when there are bodies around him, which is why the word shellshocked gets thrown around. 

I dont believe Carr is even top 5 as far as things wrong with this team, but I don't believe he is the long term solution and I dont believe he is the type of QB you rebuild with. 

[Chali21]

11 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

Shhh. Don't tell the truth. It's easier to blame carr.

Lol didn’t Brady run the last oline coach out of town because of his lack of protection?

Personally i think Carr has some pretty terrible pocket movement. Fortunately it’s something that can be improved a la Brady. Not saying Brady had bad movement skills but he’s improved them at age 40. Carr’s never really needed to be mobile in the NFL because either his line has been good or his quick release. Gruden’s offense negates his release with some long developing plays. He needs to learn how to buy time in the pocket especially with two rookie tackles. Going back to Brady, who i think runs weirder than Carr, is not an athlete but can move in the pocket. That’s something Carr needs to work on in the off season. Watson, Mahomes, Wilson all those guys have lived outside the pocket their whole life. Carr has been in a bubble in his. 

[dante9876]

41 minutes ago, Chali21 said:

Lol didn’t Brady run the last oline coach out of town because of his lack of protection?

Personally i think Carr has some pretty terrible pocket movement. Fortunately it’s something that can be improved a la Brady. Not saying Brady had bad movement skills but he’s improved them at age 40. Carr’s never really needed to be mobile in the NFL because either his line has been good or his quick release. Gruden’s offense negates his release with some long developing plays. He needs to learn how to buy time in the pocket especially with two rookie tackles. Going back to Brady, who i think runs weirder than Carr, is not an athlete but can move in the pocket. That’s something Carr needs to work on in the off season. Watson, Mahomes, Wilson all those guys have lived outside the pocket their whole life. Carr has been in a bubble in his. 

Shhhhh. Dont tell the truth. Carr has no faults. 

[Frankie2Gunz]

8 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

The fact is we have bad play from every level of the team.  There are to many moving parts so it looks like one big chicken or the egg argument.  One fact remains though.  We had one player that no matter who he had around him would produce at a high level and we got rid of him.  Everyone else seems to be dependent on having players better than themselves around in order to produce.  It does not mean everyone is trash.  Just that we will not win until we get some high end talent and/or the team learns how to play as a team.  This includes Carr.

I'm sick of hearing about Mack.  The bottom line is that Mack or not this is not close to a Super Bowl team and that is pretty evident.  No one cares about 2nd place and having Mack would not have lead to a super bowl birth, he would have just strapped us with the salary cap.  This team is at least 5 years away from contending, I don't see why that is such a hard concept to grasp.  I guess it's just easy to say, if we had Mack....  and not really thinking deeply about the whole situation. 

[drfrey13]

14 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

I'm sick of hearing about Mack.  The bottom line is that Mack or not this is not close to a Super Bowl team and that is pretty evident.  No one cares about 2nd place and having Mack would not have lead to a super bowl birth, he would have just strapped us with the salary cap.  This team is at least 5 years away from contending, I don't see why that is such a hard concept to grasp.  I guess it's just easy to say, if we had Mack....  and not really thinking deeply about the whole situation. 

First I am one of the posters that said trading Mack was the right decision considering our circumstances.  I am also a poster that has criticized us because I believe we should have prioritized signing Mack over Carr.  If we had to Carr's franchise price would have been close to his contract price so nothing lost.  Second if I have to choose between 2nd and last place I am picking 2nd.  Moving towards a championship happens one piece at a time.  If, I do not think we would have been, we were a playoff team we would just have to hit on a couple FAs and/or draft picks to be Super Bowl contenders.  Right now we are 10 players away.  If we still had Mack that number is decreased by more than one because he is a player that makes others better.  I do not want to hear that we were bad with Mack because he never had players around him or a coach that knew what they were doing.  Do not say KNJ is doing good in Seattle either because he is running Pete Carrol's defense.  He is good at motivating the players maybe but we know who is running the show.  It is like saying how great Greg Olsen is if our offence starts clicking.  I have thought about the situation deeply and realize our team has done nothing but compound mistake after mistake.  The Mack Carr situation is one of the biggest.  Sorry but this just happened a couple months ago so I bet you will hear this through next off-season or until this teams shows it can over come this mistake which means you might be hearing about this for decades the same way Vikings fans will still have a bad taste in their mouth about the Herschel Walker trade.  I do not think you realize the magnitude of trading a future HOF player in his prime.  It can go one of two ways.  We can look like the Cowboys and Herschel Walker or we can look worse than the Falcons for trading Brett Favre.  I do not know how it will turn out but seeing Carr on the field with Mack gone is like watching Reggie Nelson play while Karl Joseph is on the bench x a million.  I don't know how much better we would be but I know we would be better.

[Frankie2Gunz]

30 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

First I am one of the posters that said trading Mack was the right decision considering our circumstances.  I am also a poster that has criticized us because I believe we should have prioritized signing Mack over Carr.  If we had to Carr's franchise price would have been close to his contract price so nothing lost.  Second if I have to choose between 2nd and last place I am picking 2nd.  Moving towards a championship happens one piece at a time.  If, I do not think we would have been, we were a playoff team we would just have to hit on a couple FAs and/or draft picks to be Super Bowl contenders.  Right now we are 10 players away.  If we still had Mack that number is decreased by more than one because he is a player that makes others better.  I do not want to hear that we were bad with Mack because he never had players around him or a coach that knew what they were doing.  Do not say KNJ is doing good in Seattle either because he is running Pete Carrol's defense.  He is good at motivating the players maybe but we know who is running the show.  It is like saying how great Greg Olsen is if our offence starts clicking.  I have thought about the situation deeply and realize our team has done nothing but compound mistake after mistake.  The Mack Carr situation is one of the biggest.  Sorry but this just happened a couple months ago so I bet you will hear this through next off-season or until this teams shows it can over come this mistake which means you might be hearing about this for decades the same way Vikings fans will still have a bad taste in their mouth about the Herschel Walker trade.  I do not think you realize the magnitude of trading a future HOF player in his prime.  It can go one of two ways.  We can look like the Cowboys and Herschel Walker or we can look worse than the Falcons for trading Brett Favre.  I do not know how it will turn out but seeing Carr on the field with Mack gone is like watching Reggie Nelson play while Karl Joseph is on the bench x a million.  I don't know how much better we would be but I know we would be better.

While I agree with some of what you said a DE is not nearly as important as of a position as the QB.  That is an obvious fact.  Saying we should have kept Mack and gotten rid of Carr who has shown MVP caliber type play is also not a smart move. People don't mention the fact that Qb's can play at a high level into their late 30's where as DE's like Mack will start do decline around 30. 

I can't remember a time where a DE had a fraction of the impact the QB does throughout a game.  Don't get me wrong a quality DE who can rush the passer is an important piece to a successful team but by no means is it QB worthy.  99 percent of the time a starting QB goes down the teams chances of winning the SB are basically eviscerated, the same can not be said about a DE.  

Let's also take the emotion out of it for 1 second.  Mack has averaged 10 sacks and 75 total tackles per year as a Raider.  While thise numbers are respectable, they can be replaced at a fraction of the price.  I am not foolish, I do realize that Mack had a much greater impact than just the black and white numbers but like I said in the prior post this team is so far from contending, Mack will most likely be retired by the time we sniff the playoffs and we will be in a much better position then with all of the influx of young talent we have acquired in the trade for Mack. Bottom line is that with or without Mack this team is a disaster.  It would have been a disservice to Mack to keep such a good player, who has 3 or 4 prime years left stuck playing with this dumpster fire of a team.  The impact it would have on our cap would have been a disaster as well.  paying 23 million for a non QB ton a team that is 5 years away from contending makes zero sense.  

If the Bears don't win a Super Bowl with Mack then the trade was a success in my opinion.  That is all that matters in the NFL, no one cares about 2nd place.  We now have the pressure of drafting well and if we cant then Gruden needs to be fired and my statements about contending in 5 years will be revised to a decade.  

Also ask yourself would this team be better off with 21 year old Nick Bosa on a rookie deal for the next 5 years or Mack making 24 a year for the next 5 when he will be 32?  

[BayRaider]

I def agree with the last paragraph. Bosa at 21 on a rookie deal for 5 years or Mack on a 5 year deal making 24M and lasting until he is 32. Bosa is the easy choice here which is what I’ve been saying for a while. 

The winner of this trade will all come down who wins the SB first between the Raiders and Bears. If no teams wins the SB within the next 6-7 years it was a fail for both.