⏰ to completely clean house

[ronjon1990]

3 hours ago, jpaulthe1st said:

Again…you sound emotional. No substance…just petty insults on a discussion forum. I’m done with you big fella 

[drfrey13]

8 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said:

If we’re being honest, theres pretty much nothing he could have done Sunday to change the outcome. This team is a mess offensively rn. Looks like 2014/2018 outside of renfrow with Waller out.

I agree there is nothing Carr could have done.  MM's running ability can mask some of the problems the offense has.  He would change how the defense played us which could releave some of the pressure off of our struggling players.  I also think the team is quitting on Carr along with the coach.  If you are the leader on the field and the team still does not follow you then they quit on you also.  Carr's play could not have helped the situation but his leadership could have.  This is not a 1 week thing either.  The players are quitting because of what has taken place over years.  Listening to Carr I would have told him to not talk to me a long time ago.  Sorry but he just seems fake to me.

[Darbsk]

16 hours ago, big_palooka said:

A functional franchise with good leadership does not hire a retread coach, out of football for a decade who was a terrible talent evaluator and give them keys to the franchise

This was the problem IMO, Gruden is I think a good coach when he just sticks to that but just far too impulsive, knee jerk and poor at evaluating talent to give him total control over personnel. If we'd had a GM that he had to answer to and that had the authority to hold him accountable that would have helped I believe. Reggie was basically totally undermined by the hire, whether you like Reggie or not, that set the tone. Then Mayock was left effectively powerless.

[Darbsk]

20 hours ago, Jeremy408 said:

I am referring specifically to the emails after 10 years and a receiver with no history of stupidity killing someone over a bye week. 

If you think of some of the worst historical franchises ever like lions & Browns you've never seen either of the two happen

It's pretty much unprecedented circumstances and i agree in part, though I do have to say that the receiver in question from my experience wouldn't just have done something like that spur of the moment.

What I mean by that is if he'd just drunk and drove then maybe, but looking at the case, he had a loaded firearm in the car, had been out very late partying in a work week, drove intoxicated and also not just sped but obliterated the speed limit by three times, driving at a stupidly reckless speed with a total disregard for anyone else. 

All these factors did not come about on a one time instance in my opinion, he probably had drove drunk previously, certainly drove recklessly previously and sped previously and may have had a history with firearms previously. All those things individually are red flags and when combined together it was only a matter of time before someone got killed in a car crash or a shooting.

This wasn't out of the blue, Ruggs obviously had maturity and responsibility issues, had done stupid things previously but these were missed unfortunately and tragically before building up to an inevitable result. Now, that's not to say they were easy to spot or could have been reasonably spotted but the warning signs would have been there.

[Darbsk]

19 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

Not saying MM can keep it up but he has played as well if not better than Carr when on the field.  I would say Carr is a main issue also.  If you just look at the last 2 drives in the WFT game Carr deserves a lot of the blame.  He has also shown bad decision making during this stretch run.  Carr's shortcoming become very obvious when he does not have his team at full strength.  This has been a trend his entire career.  Do you really want a QB that is a pro bowl caliber QB if and only if the team around him is 100%.  At the current moment we are very far from being 100% and I do believe that MM gives us a better shot at winning right now with the current roster. 

This is flawed logic to me. Carr was playing at a Pro Bowl level for the first half of the season, but yet was missing a starting calibre RT, both OGs, OC James was awful the first few games and Jacobs didn't look healthy to me. He was able to do it because his receiving options were good with Ruggs, Waller and Renfrow with Edwards playing a complimentary role. Now we are missing Ruggs, our HC was shot out a cannon and Waller has been injured. Very few QBs could succeed with a terrible OL, no run game to speak of and his best two receivers not playing and having Jones and Edwards being his primary outside receivers instead of complimentary pieces.

I'm not absolving Carr of blame and he certainly has not played great and looks less certain and cavalier and has struggled with missing open guys at times and turnovers recently but there seem to be very obvious reasons why that has occured to me.

[SimonGruber]

15 hours ago, jimkelly02 said:

I’m not taking any sides here, honestly barely read the discussion.  I stepped away from posting here somewhat do to work, but mainly because the level of discussion on this board is horrible.  Unless your agreeing with someone it turns into a ****e show.  This place needs some better decorum.

Agreed even though it’s Aaron Rodgers they are writing about. It boils down to a Carr debate. One side in particular dials it up a notch IMO won’t say which one.

[big_palooka]

15 hours ago, jimkelly02 said:

This place needs some better decorum.

 

13 hours ago, jimkelly02 said:

Really? I didn’t know that thanks for 1. Sharing 2. Being a ****

 

[ronjon1990]

1 hour ago, Darbsk said:

This wasn't out of the blue, Ruggs obviously had maturity and responsibility issues, had done stupid things previously but these were missed unfortunately and tragically before building up to an inevitable result. Now, that's not to say they were easy to spot or could have been reasonably spotted but the warning signs would have been there.

This 100%. 

We'll never know the full story from within the Raiders organization, but I would find it to be utterly shocking if Ruggs was a choir boy except for that one night. 

Some people do a lot of dumb stuff and just don't get caught in the moment. But they do dumb stuff nonetheless.

Maybe Ruggs showed up to practice and worked hard and that's as far as they bothered to look into his activity, and hey, that's reasonable enough. From an organizational standpoint, there wasn't a documented history of idiotic behavior as with Arnette, so nobody is outright blaming the Raiders for taking Ruggs "despite character red flags". 

But I would bet without hesitation that signs were all over the place, it just wasn't a problem because nothing had happened yet. If one wants to say that the Raiders, as an employer, did what they should and left their employee's private affairs to the employee, I certainly can't argue there. Conversely, if one wants to say that the Raiders, as an employer with a very vested interest in their employee's health and performance and ability to maintain both at a high level, should have been more involved in Ruggs' private life, I don't think I would argue against that either. 

Personally, I fall into the latter camp. These guys are beyond well compensated, even the fringe roster and practice squad guys. Their job is to play a game. The Raiders, as a brand, imo, have a defined interest in what the players representing them are getting into insofar as there may be implications that directly impact the ability to fulfill a contract (ie: no, they have no interest in who you're sleeping with or things like that.). And, as a fan, I want the Raiders steering guys away from trouble and taking an interest in them on and off the field, again, to a reasonable degree. 

As such, I think the current organizational leadership didn't care enough to pay attention or look into what were likely fairly well known "reckless" actions until they absolutely had to address it for PR purposes.

[ronjon1990]

47 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

 

Mr. Leatherwood approves of this message.

[Bitty 2.0]

6 hours ago, Darbsk said:

This was the problem IMO, Gruden is I think a good coach when he just sticks to that but just far too impulsive, knee jerk and poor at evaluating talent to give him total control over personnel. If we'd had a GM that he had to answer to and that had the authority to hold him accountable that would have helped I believe. Reggie was basically totally undermined by the hire, whether you like Reggie or not, that set the tone. Then Mayock was left effectively powerless.

Gruden probably only picked the offensive players in the draft and they weren't that bad. 

Miller, Ruggs, Jacobs, Renfrow, Edwards,Moreau, Ingold are all good players.

[ronjon1990]

7 minutes ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

Gruden probably only picked the offensive players in the draft and they weren't that bad. 

Miller, Ruggs, Jacobs, Renfrow, Edwards,Moreau, Ingold are all good players.

Assuming he picked beyond round 1:

Miller was a solid pick, even at the time. He had the traits, though the pick may have been a tad high. 

Ruggs...yeah he was good. I think the flak comes from taking him over some of the other guys available. For me, he seemed a bit limited (to be fair, he was in the process of winning me over though) and primarily a deep threat more than a true #1 which we've lacked. Cannot complain too much and it doesn't matter now. 

Jacobs was a pick I hated. He's ok but lacks elite traits. Way too rich of a price for what we've gotten back. That will be the black mark on the pick. A 2nd or 3rd, it's not as bad. 

Renfrow, no complaints whatsoever. 

Edwards, it hasn't panned out, but I can't hate on it. I'm expecting him to be more of a year 3/4 breakout guy. 

Moreau, again no complaints.

Ditto Ingold. 

Mr. Leatherwood was always a bad pick, imo. Horrible reach. 

Simpson, can't complain. 

Parker.....ouch. 

So again, assuming he picked the offense- of these, 7 of the 10 picks were at worst ok, depending on how values Jacobs. Not bad. 

I think where it bites him is that of the 4 1st rounders, they were all relative reaches and only 1 has really planned out (hard to count Ruggs). 

I think moreso, what bites him is FA pickups. 

[SBXISBXVSBXVIII]

19 hours ago, jpaulthe1st said:

You sound emotional. Every one of your replies read like an angry teenager that can’t fathom another human having a different perspective.  
 

To respond to your point, that receiving corps was either all below average in general or below average in that point of their careers. Lazard and MVS will be 4/5 receivers anywhere they go outside of Green Bay and Graham was a shell of his New Orleans self. Marcedes Lewis is Marcedes Lewis. 
 

 

I'm not going to debate whether Green Bay's receiving corps was/is bad, average or good. I think the important thing to take into consideration is, a HOF/MVP QB like Rodgers, can elevate those receivers to a respectable level. Just my $.02 

[SBXISBXVSBXVIII]

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

 

LOL. I'm wondering what the decorum was like in prison.

[BayRaider]

 

[SimonGruber]

3 minutes ago, BayRaider said:

 

Miss Romo Rants haha