Jump to content

The Good, the Bad, the EXTEND JOSH JACOBS vs. Seahawks (Post-game chat)


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Isn't that kind of the idea with supporting a team?

I just don't understand why you would want a team not to win.............losing for a better draft pick to me is just anathema. Draft picks are way over rated, plus if we want a player we can always trade up and get them anyway. You just said Victory Mondays are the best so it seems like you care a little? I just don't understand this 😁

I just hate losing 😂 and any win Raiders get best to look on the bright side. We’re still 4-7 and basically one loss anyway from being out of the playoffs. 
 

I agree with you. If there’s a player in the draft we want , just go get them. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

The win feels good, but Josh doesn't play to win, he plays not to lose. It's hard to be confident in that in terms of moving forward. We won a shootout against a bottom 1/3 D, and looking at some of the missed opportunities, it could have been a 2+ score win. Play calling has put us in a lot of one score situations that seem totally unnecessary, and it screws with the flow. We saw it again with our Jekyll and Hyde halves. 

Agree with a lot of what you wrote but I'm unsure about this. I liked the balance of play calls and I guess in every game you could pick one or two you would do differently. We went for it on a couple of 4th downs and often this season we've gone for longer pass plays on 3rd down instead of the perhaps more conservative run call so I don't think that is consistent with playing not to lose.

I guess the FG attempt when we had 14 or so seconds left I'd have probably attempted a shot at the end zone there, but I can't recall the down or distance specifically. Is it maybe that he hasn't quite gotten the balance quite right in terms of aggression, he seems to me to be over-aggressive at times and too conservative at others but I wouldn't say the overall is a timid kind of game plan. I'm interested in what makes you think he is playing not to lose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Agree with a lot of what you wrote but I'm unsure about this. I liked the balance of play calls and I guess in every game you could pick one or two you would do differently. We went for it on a couple of 4th downs and often this season we've gone for longer pass plays on 3rd down instead of the perhaps more conservative run call so I don't think that is consistent with playing not to lose.

I guess the FG attempt when we had 14 or so seconds left I'd have probably attempted a shot at the end zone there, but I can't recall the down or distance specifically. Is it maybe that he hasn't quite gotten the balance quite right in terms of aggression, he seems to me to be over-aggressive at times and too conservative at others but I wouldn't say the overall is a timid kind of game plan. I'm interested in what makes you think he is playing not to lose?

The way he manages the clock, primarily. It goes back to my opinion he's a great OC but not HC (yet, which is problematic imo given he's not a rookie HC). 

We went for it on a 4th and picked it up on the drive we kicked that FG. We had momentum. Instead, we opted for a FG despite having time. 

Another time was in OT. Kicking that long of a FG, knowing it wouldn't mean "game" is just....it irks me. It's settling, especially given that we have practically nothing to lose. We missed and gave Seattle a short field and thankfully Crosby showed up huge. 

The 4th down tosses....like why? You need 5 inches. 

It's those sort of silly decisions that scream to me "I hope we win" instead of "We're going to win this damn thing". And it's decisions like those that I feel keep games unnecessarily close. 

A win is a win, and I totally understand that. Whether it be 37-34 or 41-34 or whatever it may be. At the same time, a loss is a loss whether it be by 1 point, 3 points, or 20 points. 

Yesterday, we got lucky to get a second chance in OT and closed it out. But we got lucky nonetheless. 

Going back to the FG at the end of the first half- maybe we don't get a TD on the play. But if we did, we don't even go into OT yesterday and need to get lucky. Maybe we walk away with 0 points on the drive and it winds up being a 34-31 game at the end, though given the time, down, and distance, this is the least likely scenario. Chances to win the game in regulation as opposed to going into sudden death OT have got to be capitalized on. Every team will luck into a grind it out win here or there, but truly good ones flat out win games. 

Give me a missed chance at a FG at the end of the first and a 34-31 loss in regulation over a 37-34 loss in OT because we didn't take the chance and didn't just get lucky. 

To me, the decisions just give me that "Golly, I sure hope this works...." feeling from him way more than a "I have a plan to win this game, let's do it." For me, as a skeptic of McDaniels, it's just concerning. "Whew, we won!" mentality that lacks real confidence, and I don't know how much tread you can get out of that.

Deep down he knows he has to get some wins or Davis will eventually pull the plug. Maybe not this year, but it would happen. And that, to me, leads to playing not to lose. He always follows wins the same way he follows losses- "We gotta trust the process." Mmk, but what is the process? Hoping a tight game happens to go our way in OT? I've seen us look better in defeat than we have in wins simply because we were trying to win

I get everyone being happy with the win. I am too. But other than Josh's typical platitudes not sounding like as much of an excuse, I just don't walk away from it saying "Ah, I see what we're doing. Sweet, let's get this!". I walk away from it saying "Josh is probably crying tears of joy he doesn't have another closed doors meeting with Mark this week.". Maybe we get better and keep winning. But this wasn't a game that, to me, marks any real significant turning point because too much was left on the table and we got incredibly lucky at the end. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Agree with a lot of what you wrote but I'm unsure about this. I liked the balance of play calls and I guess in every game you could pick one or two you would do differently. We went for it on a couple of 4th downs and often this season we've gone for longer pass plays on 3rd down instead of the perhaps more conservative run call so I don't think that is consistent with playing not to lose.

I guess the FG attempt when we had 14 or so seconds left I'd have probably attempted a shot at the end zone there, but I can't recall the down or distance specifically. Is it maybe that he hasn't quite gotten the balance quite right in terms of aggression, he seems to me to be over-aggressive at times and too conservative at others but I wouldn't say the overall is a timid kind of game plan. I'm interested in what makes you think he is playing not to lose?

I was thinking about this yesterday. I think he’s finding his groove a bit. He’s done a good job of adjusting to the strength of the offense which is Jacobs. He hasn’t been perfect, but for stretches the offense has looked really good. I hope he keeps it up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

The way he manages the clock, primarily. It goes back to my opinion he's a great OC but not HC (yet, which is problematic imo given he's not a rookie HC). 

We went for it on a 4th and picked it up on the drive we kicked that FG. We had momentum. Instead, we opted for a FG despite having time. 

Another time was in OT. Kicking that long of a FG, knowing it wouldn't mean "game" is just....it irks me. It's settling, especially given that we have practically nothing to lose. We missed and gave Seattle a short field and thankfully Crosby showed up huge. 

The 4th down tosses....like why? You need 5 inches. 

It's those sort of silly decisions that scream to me "I hope we win" instead of "We're going to win this damn thing". And it's decisions like those that I feel keep games unnecessarily close. 

A win is a win, and I totally understand that. Whether it be 37-34 or 41-34 or whatever it may be. At the same time, a loss is a loss whether it be by 1 point, 3 points, or 20 points. 

Yesterday, we got lucky to get a second chance in OT and closed it out. But we got lucky nonetheless. 

Going back to the FG at the end of the first half- maybe we don't get a TD on the play. But if we did, we don't even go into OT yesterday and need to get lucky. Maybe we walk away with 0 points on the drive and it winds up being a 34-31 game at the end, though given the time, down, and distance, this is the least likely scenario. Chances to win the game in regulation as opposed to going into sudden death OT have got to be capitalized on. Every team will luck into a grind it out win here or there, but truly good ones flat out win games. 

Give me a missed chance at a FG at the end of the first and a 34-31 loss in regulation over a 37-34 loss in OT because we didn't take the chance and didn't just get lucky. 

To me, the decisions just give me that "Golly, I sure hope this works...." feeling from him way more than a "I have a plan to win this game, let's do it." For me, as a skeptic of McDaniels, it's just concerning. "Whew, we won!" mentality that lacks real confidence, and I don't know how much tread you can get out of that.

Deep down he knows he has to get some wins or Davis will eventually pull the plug. Maybe not this year, but it would happen. And that, to me, leads to playing not to lose. He always follows wins the same way he follows losses- "We gotta trust the process." Mmk, but what is the process? Hoping a tight game happens to go our way in OT? I've seen us look better in defeat than we have in wins simply because we were trying to win

I get everyone being happy with the win. I am too. But other than Josh's typical platitudes not sounding like as much of an excuse, I just don't walk away from it saying "Ah, I see what we're doing. Sweet, let's get this!". I walk away from it saying "Josh is probably crying tears of joy he doesn't have another closed doors meeting with Mark this week.". Maybe we get better and keep winning. But this wasn't a game that, to me, marks any real significant turning point because too much was left on the table and we got incredibly lucky at the end. 

 

Good post, I just like talking football and I get what you're thinking now 🙂.

To me, and this coming from someone who was initially sceptical of Josh McDaniels and really wanted Jim Harbaugh I actually like what I'm seeing from him, he's learned that the running game is fundamental and adjusted, he's getting a heck of a lot (in the running game)out of a pretty average Oline group, he's cut down on the odd decisions, though there are still one or two and I know you don't agree but I think he's evolving after being an OC and not having that HC responsibility for over ten years.

I'm still not entirely sold and I want to see some more improvements moving forward but I think the playcalling, decisions, and game plans are all heading the right way. We're still far, far from perfect and our D needs numerous pieces before are remotely contenders but I think there's something there to work with. As I said, I'm probably of a slightly different view but it's usually productive talking with people with differing views and for me, I'm basically kind of viewing him as a rookie HC as he hadn't done it for so long. I think he's finding his feet after probably having his ego hit a bit and starting off a lot worse than he expected. We'll find out an awful lot about the guy over the next few weeks and months but again what I've seen these last couple weeks has me encouraged as it could all have gone off the rails completely. One thing is for sure, it'll be a fascinating journey!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

The win feels good, but Josh doesn't play to win, he plays not to lose. It's hard to be confident in that in terms of moving forward. We won a shootout against a bottom 1/3 D, and looking at some of the missed opportunities, it could have been a 2+ score win. Play calling has put us in a lot of one score situations that seem totally unnecessary, and it screws with the flow. We saw it again with our Jekyll and Hyde halves. 

Same complaint and result people had with Gruden. Some coaches play conservative and some are cavalier. It can work or not both ways. It's all about striking balance.

Just give the man his due. Team played with energy, fought and won. Negating all the "he's lost the locker room" narratives. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

The way he manages the clock, primarily. It goes back to my opinion he's a great OC but not HC (yet, which is problematic imo given he's not a rookie HC). 

We went for it on a 4th and picked it up on the drive we kicked that FG. We had momentum. Instead, we opted for a FG despite having time. 

Another time was in OT. Kicking that long of a FG, knowing it wouldn't mean "game" is just....it irks me. It's settling, especially given that we have practically nothing to lose. We missed and gave Seattle a short field and thankfully Crosby showed up huge. 

The 4th down tosses....like why? You need 5 inches. 

It's those sort of silly decisions that scream to me "I hope we win" instead of "We're going to win this damn thing". And it's decisions like those that I feel keep games unnecessarily close. 

A win is a win, and I totally understand that. Whether it be 37-34 or 41-34 or whatever it may be. At the same time, a loss is a loss whether it be by 1 point, 3 points, or 20 points. 

Yesterday, we got lucky to get a second chance in OT and closed it out. But we got lucky nonetheless. 

Going back to the FG at the end of the first half- maybe we don't get a TD on the play. But if we did, we don't even go into OT yesterday and need to get lucky. Maybe we walk away with 0 points on the drive and it winds up being a 34-31 game at the end, though given the time, down, and distance, this is the least likely scenario. Chances to win the game in regulation as opposed to going into sudden death OT have got to be capitalized on. Every team will luck into a grind it out win here or there, but truly good ones flat out win games. 

Give me a missed chance at a FG at the end of the first and a 34-31 loss in regulation over a 37-34 loss in OT because we didn't take the chance and didn't just get lucky. 

To me, the decisions just give me that "Golly, I sure hope this works...." feeling from him way more than a "I have a plan to win this game, let's do it." For me, as a skeptic of McDaniels, it's just concerning. "Whew, we won!" mentality that lacks real confidence, and I don't know how much tread you can get out of that.

Deep down he knows he has to get some wins or Davis will eventually pull the plug. Maybe not this year, but it would happen. And that, to me, leads to playing not to lose. He always follows wins the same way he follows losses- "We gotta trust the process." Mmk, but what is the process? Hoping a tight game happens to go our way in OT? I've seen us look better in defeat than we have in wins simply because we were trying to win

I get everyone being happy with the win. I am too. But other than Josh's typical platitudes not sounding like as much of an excuse, I just don't walk away from it saying "Ah, I see what we're doing. Sweet, let's get this!". I walk away from it saying "Josh is probably crying tears of joy he doesn't have another closed doors meeting with Mark this week.". Maybe we get better and keep winning. But this wasn't a game that, to me, marks any real significant turning point because too much was left on the table and we got incredibly lucky at the end. 

 

I want to know what HC makes the perfect call every time. People laugh and question Andy Reid all the time for some bonehead decisions and bad clock management and he's lauded as an all time great HC. 

You're clearly hypercritical of Josh clearly and unless he calls a flawless game, you are going to complain. Easy to look at one play here or there and disregard mistakes that set drive back. They were in control of the game and Foster dropped a 3rd down pass. Was he not playing to win with that play call?

And I love how you diminish the defensive effort to get the ball back as "we got lucky"... Maxx making a play to stop their drive.... just got lucky is all. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets GOOOO! 
D was put in bad spots and made plays all day! Love to see it. (although they dropped like 3 INTS) Maxx is special, hope we dont waste his talent.
Love seeing Jacobs look fast. What a game.
That delayed slant pass to Jacobs was a beauty, I think Carr audibles to it as well. 
I hope, this is the O finally understanding the system. 

Playing aggresive, leads to mistakes, which happened, but it also leads to more scores. 
I like this for both our O and D. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

I want to know what HC makes the perfect call every time. People laugh and question Andy Reid all the time for some bonehead decisions and bad clock management and he's lauded as an all time great HC. 

You're clearly hypercritical of Josh clearly and unless he calls a flawless game, you are going to complain. Easy to look at one play here or there and disregard mistakes that set drive back. They were in control of the game and Foster dropped a 3rd down pass. Was he not playing to win with that play call?

And I love how you diminish the defensive effort to get the ball back as "we got lucky"... Maxx making a play to stop their drive.... just got lucky is all. 

 

No coach makes perfect calls. 

In a vacuum, Josh called a pretty decent game yesterday. 

It's also one game among many he's coached. 

And yes, it was lucky. Nothing about our defensive performances to date indicate we'd likely get a stop before they moved into sudden death field goal range. Do it consistently, I won't say it was a lucky break. But until then, yes, I'll call it what it is until proven otherwise. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...