Raiders Defense

[drfrey13]

6 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Who does Worley play over though? Mullen is locked in on one side, Joyner in the slot, Abram at SS, and Randall at FS who has more range and way better ball skills than Worley. Kelce put up 197 yards in two meetings against us last season, why didn't we have Worley shadowing him to give our offense the opportunity to build an early lead if he's the elite TE stopping DB? 

What does Abram staying with Hill have to do with anything? Is Worley and his 4.7 forty time going to cover Hill? lol. 

Joyner was meh last season but at least he has played at an elite level in the past and it's pretty clear the staff is dead set at starting him in the slot. Worley at his best was just okay and again that was in a zone heavy scheme where offenses couldn't exploit his lack of speed as much. 

If Worley is playing significant snaps over a rookie we take in the top 20 there's a major issue with the guy we drafted. In an ideal 4-2-5 defense we'll have Mullen/First round rookie on the outside, Joyner in the slot, and Randall/Abram at safety. 

I said he should have been shadowing Kelce the entire time.  It was working while we had the match-up.  Reid saw it and adjusted to get Kelce on Joseph.  That is Joseph's Achilles heel and it worked for them.  So why was Worley not shadowing Kelce?  Ask the coaches.  Was Reid to good or was it that the entire secondary fell apart  for a quarter when Worley was better served playing somewhere else because he was the next man up after injuries.  I can not tell you what the thought process is for my children but you want me to tell you what Gruden or PG was thinking.  All I know is Worley does a good job covering good big TEs better than anyone else we can spare in our secondary. 

Why have we not signed and drafted players to beat KC.  This is ridiculous that Gruden has not made us a Super Bowl winner yet.  Can you tell me his thinking why he has not yet.  We should fire him because certain coaches are better than him and who cares if we can find a coach that is better.

We are just being practical.  Has anyone here been pounding the table for us to sign him from the beginning of FA?  No.  We are just looking at what the best available is and who can help the team for the right price.

[NYRaider]

Just now, jimkelly02 said:

It’s one thing to say “hey I think there’s better options out there than Worley” but it’s quite another to advocate that we’d be best with Nevin Lawson starting until a rookie can take the job.  

then post videos of Worley’s bad plays.... when Lawson had the most iconic bad play ever.  (Insert dropped INT play here)

you can’t complain that we didn’t force many INTs and then advocate for Lawson.... he’s the most successful NFL CB to never get an INT.

I don't want Lawson or Worley starting. I want whichever rookie we take in the top 20 to start opposite of Mullen. 

Lawson can at least play in press man coverage, is very good in run support, and is currently on the longest active streak in the league of consecutive games not allowing 75+ yards. 

Worley gave up 834 yards in coverage last season and had a 64% catch rate. While Lawson gave up 181 yards and had a 46% catch rate.

[NYRaider]

4 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

I dont think anyone has claimed he can and often does shut down elite TEs, again more exaggeration ........but he can provide an option there so we dont have to put all our eggs in the unproven Abrams basket.

You don't have to put all of your eggs into the Abram's basket. That's why you invested $18M into Littleton and Kwit and why you signed Randall. All of those guys have shown they can cover TE's. Plus Abram is a first round pick it's going to be sink or swim for him. I'm not going to feel more comfortable playing a guy that was statistically one of the worst CB's in the league last year and doesn't tackle at S against TEs. 

[jimkelly02]

 

While Worley was far from great he wasn’t as bad as NYRaider portrays it.  He actually had a decent stretch of games during the season.

the guys been a starter since his rookie year, 49 starts by the age of 25.

he was targeted 72x, allowed 38rec (52%) and 634yds, 4 TD.

That’s not THAT bad.  

https://www.sisdatahub.com/players/4270

 

[Darbsk]

You can tell its a lockdown, we're arguing back and forth for 3 pages on a backup 4th/5th string CB or safety 😀

  

[NYRaider]

5 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

I said he should have been shadowing Kelce the entire time.  It was working while we had the match-up.  Reid saw it and adjusted to get Kelce on Joseph.  That is Joseph's Achilles heel and it worked for them.  So why was Worley not shadowing Kelce?  Ask the coaches.  Was Reid to good or was it that the entire secondary fell apart  for a quarter when Worley was better served playing somewhere else because he was the next man up after injuries.  I can not tell you what the thought process is for my children but you want me to tell you what Gruden or PG was thinking.  All I know is Worley does a good job covering good big TEs better than anyone else we can spare in our secondary. 

I'd feel more confident with Randall, Abram, Kwit, or Littleton covering TE's than Worley. Like the numbers don't lie, Worley gave up 834 yards (68th best), 16.0 yards per reception (74th best), and a 64% catch rate (46th best). There's a reason Worley and KJ got the boot. They suck and they don't fit our scheme. 

[NYRaider]

1 minute ago, jimkelly02 said:

 

While Worley was far from great he wasn’t as bad as NYRaider portrays it.  He actually had a decent stretch of games during the season.

the guys been a starter since his rookie year, 49 starts by the age of 25.

he was targeted 72x, allowed 38rec (52%) and 634yds, 4 TD.

That’s not THAT bad.  

https://www.sisdatahub.com/players/4270

 

According to player profiler he was targeted 81 times, allowed 52 receptions (64%), 834 yards, 5 TD's and allowed a 118.0 passer when targeted. 

[Darbsk]

5 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

I don't want Lawson or Worley starting. I want whichever rookie we take in the top 20 to start opposite of Mullen. 

Lawson can at least play in press man coverage, is very good in run support, and is currently on the longest active streak in the league of consecutive games not allowing 75+ yards. 

Worley gave up 834 yards in coverage last season and had a 64% catch rate. While Lawson gave up 181 yards and had a 46% catch rate.

I like Lawson, liked him in Detroit. His coverage is underrated but he might have legitimately the worst hands ive ever seen. I think he should start the first couple games till the rookie finds his feet....... providing we draft a rookie high. He's a better cover guy and faster than Worley no doubt, also tackles very well.

[drfrey13]

3 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

According to player profiler he was targeted 81 times, allowed 52 receptions (64%), 834 yards, 5 TD's and allowed a 118.0 passer when targeted. 

	Pos	Int	Tgt	Cmp	Cmp%	Yds	Yds/Cmp	Yds/Tgt	TD	Rat	DADOT	Air	YAC
	CB	1	73	49	67.10%	731	14.9	10	4	112.3	11.8	495	236
	CB	1	86	46	53.50%	711	15.5	8.3	5	95.6	11	447	264

 

Which player would you rather have?

[oakdb36]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

Almost zero chance that we carry 7 CB's on the roster. You don't have to start a rookie to begin the season. You can start Lawson who played better than Worley last season, has started more games, is a better scheme fit, better against the run, and actually on the roster. 

Lawson is suspended week 1.

[NYRaider]

1 minute ago, drfrey13 said:

	Pos	Int	Tgt	Cmp	Cmp%	Yds	Yds/Cmp	Yds/Tgt	TD	Rat	DADOT	Air	YAC
	CB	1	73	49	67.10%	731	14.9	10	4	112.3	11.8	495	236
	CB	1	86	46	53.50%	711	15.5	8.3	5	95.6	11	447	264

 

Which player would you rather have?

I'll take the player who can play in press man, is solid in run support, and played okay for us last year. 

[Darbsk]

Id like to by the end of the year have a secondary that has Mullen and Jaylon Johnson on the outside, Amik Robertson in the slot with Abram, Joyner and Randall (or Ashtyn Davis) at safety. Unlikely, and I don't think they'd move Joyner back there but I think we could cover a lot of options with that lineup with Lawson and one of Isaiah Johnson or Nixon stepping up as a quality backup. 

[NYRaider]

5 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

I like Lawson, liked him in Detroit. His coverage is underrated but he might have legitimately the worst hands ive ever seen. I think he should start the first couple games till the rookie finds his feet....... providing we draft a rookie high. He's a better cover guy and faster than Worley no doubt, also tackles very well.

Lawson is okay as a depth option and he actually fits in Gunther's scheme. I just think when you're retooling a roster you want to keep players that fit into the mold of what you're trying to do. Worley can't play in press man, he sucks in run support, and he doesn't have the range to play safety. He's an okay depth option in a zone heavy scheme but he shouldn't be playing in a scheme like ours. 

[NYRaider]

Just now, Darbsk said:

Id like to by the end of the year have a secondary that has Mullen and Jaylon Johnson on the outside, Amik Robertson in the slot with Abram, Joyner and Randall (or Ashtyn Davis) at safety. Unlikely, and I don't think they'd move Joyner back there but I think we could cover a lot of options with that lineup with Lawson and one of Isaiah Johnson or Nixon stepping up as a quality backup. 

We tried to address CB in free agency but missed. Can't plug every hole in a major rebuild in one year. We're going to have a very young secondary and there will be growing pains. But ultimately you want to have guys on the field that fit the identity you're building. Which is a big, fast, and physical unit. Even if guys like Mullen and a rookie like Terrell/Johnson take their lumps that's to be expected as young players. It'll just finally be nice to have a defense where everyone is young and athletic. 

[Darbsk]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

We tried to address CB in free agency but missed. Can't plug every hole in a major rebuild in one year. We're going to have a very young secondary and there will be growing pains. But ultimately you want to have guys on the field that fit the identity you're building. Which is a big, fast, and physical unit. Even if guys like Mullen and a rookie like Terrell/Johnson take their lumps that's to be expected as young players. It'll just finally be nice to have a defense where everyone is young and athletic. 

Agreed, absolutely. Those guys all have a very competitive spirit about them too, probably expect a lot if PI flags while they get seasoned. With the limitations in camp and rookie activities could be a rough transition for a few. Id only bring back Worley as a role player, not a starting CB and only on a very cheap deal.