Who do you want to see as our next HC and GM?

[Geezy]

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Recency bias is unreal in this coaching situation. Majority of Raider fans are behind AP to the ridiculous. All the twitter personalities, etc. hyping it up.

If/when he's hired, it will be interesting to see how quickly things turn if they start losing games. 

I've never seen a fan base enamored with a coach who's unproven and resume is can fit on a post it note. It's truly wild. 

 

For me it’s what he did for the culture of the organization. Getting back to basics, doing it the Raider Way as opposed to being someone else. Im intrigued on what he can do with a full off-season and with his guys. I think going toe to toe with KC is a huge plus. Defense was much better, whether he unleashed players or coaches we can’t deny there was overall improvement when he took over. 
 

End of day, it comes down to if he can build an offensive staff and if he can formulate a plan for the future we can believe in. As a fan it was much more fun rooting for the Raiders with a leader like AP than a geek like JMD who had no personality and hasn’t proven he can build something in his image. We are the Raiders, trying to be something we are not was not fun in the least. I love how AP embraced the culture and I believe the e players did too. I love the brand of football we were playing at the end of the season, a decent QB and I believe we would’ve snuck into the playoffs. 
 

I don’t remember Vrabel having an extensive resume when he took over for the Titans either, got to start somewhere. 

[Geezy]

2 hours ago, Jeremy408 said:

Mcdaniels had a losing record when we hired him & many fans backed him because he was "highly sought after." This isn't worse than that 

Lmao facts 

[Geezy]

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

I think the majority didn't like the JMD hire or wanted someone else. Most, including myself wanted Harbaugh and Dodds. 

This is different. You got a fan base pounding the table for AP, who has proven nothing over big name guys (Harbaugh, Vrabel) and young guys who look extremely promising (Johnson). 

If hired, it's win or hit the bricks. I don't want to see 3 or 4  years lost training a coach so to speak when there are guys right now that can do this job to the fullest.  

I think the majority would take Harbaugh and Johnson in a heartbeat. Have they interviewed? 

[Geezy]

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

When AP makes the playoffs 4 years in a row, the he can garner excuses for 2 down years. His honeymoon period is over. You don't given an unproven guy with no resume much leash. 

You wanted to give McD 3 years though. Only thing he proved was he was a sorry HC and rode the backs of BB and Tom. 

[bucksavage1]

30 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

didn't like the game management and decision making. Playing overly conservative in stretches to the detriment of the team. I can't shake the Minnesota loss off a bye when they look completely unprepared and uninspired. 

One thing to play all out against KC and get a win. But then look completely deflated and stuck against the Colts. 

Colts and Vikings were borderline playoff teams. Where the offense let us down in those games. The defense perhaps had their best game against Minnesota but having a rookie QB the inconsistency showed its head 

Yes he needs to improve game management and decision making but that can be improved upon. Especially he had not prepared to be a HC in the offseason. Incredibly hard to win In the NFL, like you said. Just witnessed Mcvay have several coach mistakes on game management and decision making

[bucksavage1]

4 minutes ago, Geezy said:

You wanted to give McD 3 years though. Only thing he proved was he was a sorry HC and rode the backs of BB and Tom. 

The main question is , if McDaniels was the coach instead of AP and we finished the year like we did, people would have no argument going into next season who would be the coach 

[bucksavage1]

The biggest issue everyone had about the Raiders the last several years was the defense. No matter who the QB was it was always the bad defense we had for nearly 2 decades. 

Im not sure how we can just let that go of that progress without seeing a full offseason of it

[Nightmare]

8 minutes ago, bucksavage1 said:

The main question is , if McDaniels was the coach instead of AP and we finished the year like we did, people would have no argument going into next season who would be the coach 

I disagree with that. I think McDaniels had enough on tape that even if he kept his job and finished with a 5-4 stretch including a win in KC, people would have still seen enough. I definitely had.

So even if he finished out the way AP did this year we still would have missed the playoffs and most knew what he was about as both a person and a coach by that point.

He was who he was, and it's not a "Raider" that we have in AP. Which quite clearly buys you a certain amount of credit in the bank.

Edited January 18 by Nightmare

[BackinBlack]

37 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

I've given respect where it is due. Getting buy in, cleaning up penalties and improving the culture post JMD.

I didn't like the game management and decision making. Playing overly conservative in stretches to the detriment of the team. I can't shake the Minnesota loss off a bye when they look completely unprepared and uninspired. 

One thing to play all out against KC and get a win. But then look completely deflated and stuck against the Colts. 

To me, they beat some bad teams with terrible QBs. They played an inspired game against KC and won. Then played some lackluster games with no emotion. The emotion was not consistent. 

I prefer an offensive coach, for reasons I previously laid out. But that's to each their own. If I am rolling the dice no an unproven coach, I'd like Johnson or Slowik over AP personally but respect some don't see it that way. 

Tough to say the looked completely unprepared and uninspired while holding a team to 3 points no? 
I’d argue the D had their best game off the bye. 

The O was horrific no doubt, but not sure why you’d lump the D in with them.

Ive been told too, when the O struggles its acceptable for the D to just give up points as they tire out… so even more impressive they battled the whole game. 

the D played with emotion every week. 

I think as a first time Interm coach.. it is completely fair that he wasn’t able to overhaul the O… with a rookie OC playcaller and QB. 

I think on a flipped scenario, where we hired an IHC who was O based, and he had the number 1 O for 9 weeks but a disaster D… 
youd be saying, look what he did with what he knows… he needs someone to help the D though. 

-
IMO a rookie OC player caller and QB deserves to be taking into consideration when saying the whole team look unprepared and uninspired. 

[big_palooka]

14 minutes ago, bucksavage1 said:

The biggest issue everyone had about the Raiders the last several years was the defense. No matter who the QB was it was always the bad defense we had for nearly 2 decades. 

Im not sure how we can just let that go of that progress without seeing a full offseason of it

If Graham is hired for a HC job, do you still feel this way?

[big_palooka]

23 minutes ago, Geezy said:

You wanted to give McD 3 years though. Only thing he proved was he was a sorry HC and rode the backs of BB and Tom. 

I didn't want to give him 3 years. I argued coaches should get 3 years to put their plan together.  

I argued to give it time after year 1 because I didn't buy the roster as a playoff team like many thought. Was out soon as it was apparent their plan (revolving around Jimmy G) was a failure and the team was rudderless. 

 

[Jeremy408]

21 minutes ago, bucksavage1 said:

The main question is , if McDaniels was the coach instead of AP and we finished the year like we did, people would have no argument going into next season who would be the coach 

This is one of my primary arguements 

[NickButera]

2 hours ago, Jeremy408 said:

. Overall, it just feels like hiring another coach(even Harbaugh to some extent) is trying outsmarting yourself.

 

This right here. 

The facts are:

• We had a very high ranked o-line (don't ask me how, I'm still trying to figure that out), but there's a lot of good there.
• We have a decent WR corps and TE
• AP and Graham had the #1 ranked defense over 9 games. That's not a fluke
• We're probably a QB away from being a team good enough to win a playoff game, or 2 dependent on the QB. 

I'm an enthusiast of rolling with the known quantity rather than risk throwing away the baby with the bathwater if we try rolling with a new coach (that's not a without-a-doubt proven winner)

[Jeremy408]

26 minutes ago, NickButera said:

This right here. 

The facts are:

• We had a very high ranked o-line (don't ask me how, I'm still trying to figure that out), but there's a lot of good there.
• We have a decent WR corps and TE
• AP and Graham had the #1 ranked defense over 9 games. That's not a fluke
• We're probably a QB away from being a team good enough to win a playoff game, or 2 dependent on the QB. 

I'm an enthusiast of rolling with the known quantity rather than risk throwing away the baby with the bathwater if we try rolling with a new coach (that's not a without-a-doubt proven winner)

Something else that I think everyone here has to agree on regardless if it really happens or not: if Max Crosby(an all pro player in his prime already under contract for multiple years) is on another team next year, whoever the courage is under those circumstances is already a bad hire(regardless of whatever someone tries to argue)

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, Geezy said:

I think the majority would take Harbaugh and Johnson in a heartbeat. Have they interviewed? 

That's been my point in all of this. Two throw away interviews have been done (Frazier and Richard) so far. There has been no interviews with the top candidates.