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

[big_palooka]

[big_palooka]

2 hours ago, NERaiders said:

Frank Smith for me. Gruden discipline will carry weight with MD. Pair him with Ian Cunningham who grew up under Ozzie Newsome.

The coordinators will be interesting. I'd be tempted to keep Graham. He was highly regarded coming in here. 

Low key like this idea. Cunningham is a good candidate. People will crap on it because the Bears are a bad team, but that guy knows his stuff. 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

My short list of candidates:

GM 

- Ed Dodds, Assistant GM, Colts

- John Spytek, Assistant GM, Buccaneers 

- Ran Carthon, Player Personnel, 49ers

- Alec Halaby, Assistant GM, Eagles

- Joe Hortiz, Player Personnel, Ravens

- Mike Borgonzi, Assistant GM, Chiefs

- Adam Peters, Assistant GM, 49ers

- Champ Kelly, Interim GM, Raiders

When googling a list of GM candidates and trying pass it off as "my short list", be sure to check the dates. Ran Carthon is the GM of the Titans right now. You googled a list of 2023 candidates 😂

[ronjon1990]

10 minutes ago, nickdawg said:

So here’s my question; while not dismissing where the defense ranks, it makes sense to take into account the “why?” aspect of it. For instance, if you watch the games, the defense looks decent-ish, but they’re so ranked relatively low in most statistical categories. Why? 
 

Maybe because the offense has been so very bad that they’re on the field for far too long and end up burning out by the 4th. 
 

I don’t know of that’s the reality or not, but it certainly looks that way when you watch the games. 
 

Stats can tell whatever story you want them to. 

Graham has a little bit of an excuse for this year due to the offense being putrid. 

That said, the defense has only really looked decent-ish because the offense has been so bad. We've played mostly inept offenses and the good ones we played had little issue with us. Most of the scores were closer, for the box score scouts, but Detroit wasn't on their A game and still could've put up 40+ on us. There's really just no way to account for Graham's annual bottom barrel rankings. If we consistently lost games 20-17  and held opposing offenses mostly in check, sure, there's an  argument to be made. 

But the reality is we've looked average against abysmal competition and caught some lucky breaks against better ones. We've been incredibly lucky to not be blown out in embarrassing fashion on a few occasions (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit), even with adjusting for the offense's ineptitude. 

[big_palooka]

10 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Graham has a little bit of an excuse for this year due to the offense being putrid. 

That said, the defense has only really looked decent-ish because the offense has been so bad. We've played mostly inept offenses and the good ones we played had little issue with us. Most of the scores were closer, for the box score scouts, but Detroit wasn't on their A game and still could've put up 40+ on us. There's really just no way to account for Graham's annual bottom barrel rankings. If we consistently lost games 20-17  and held opposing offenses mostly in check, sure, there's an  argument to be made. 

But the reality is we've looked average against abysmal competition and caught some lucky breaks against better ones. We've been incredibly lucky to not be blown out in embarrassing fashion on a few occasions (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit), even with adjusting for the offense's ineptitude. 

He's done more with less on that side of the ball. They are at or near the bottom of spending on defense. 

[ronjon1990]

1 minute ago, big_palooka said:

He's done more with less on that side of the ball. They are at or near the bottom of spending on defense. 

And as long as Graham still walks our halls, I wouldn't waste money on it either. His overall track record is indisputable, and it's bad. The sooner he joins the soup line with his benefactors, the better. 

[Darbsk]

15 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Graham has a little bit of an excuse for this year due to the offense being putrid. 

That said, the defense has only really looked decent-ish because the offense has been so bad. We've played mostly inept offenses and the good ones we played had little issue with us. Most of the scores were closer, for the box score scouts, but Detroit wasn't on their A game and still could've put up 40+ on us. There's really just no way to account for Graham's annual bottom barrel rankings. If we consistently lost games 20-17  and held opposing offenses mostly in check, sure, there's an  argument to be made. 

But the reality is we've looked average against abysmal competition and caught some lucky breaks against better ones. We've been incredibly lucky to not be blown out in embarrassing fashion on a few occasions (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Detroit), even with adjusting for the offense's ineptitude. 

I wouldn’t really claim to know what he’s done previous to this stint with the Raiders but this year, with this talent he’s done very well I think. The defence played very well against the Lions and the much vaunted Lions team had chance after chance after chance with our offence continually giving them the ball. I don’t see how anyone could fail to be impressed with that performance given the tools we had to work with. I think it’s disingenuous to say Detroit could have put up 40, we were in that game and with even average QB play I think we’d have been 50/50 to win.

[RaidersAreOne]

I was firmly on the Harbaugh/Dodds bus myself last time we went through the circus. It'll be interesting to see if those two are rumored to us again.,

[big_palooka]

There will be a lot of time to debate all this. But I really want to see someone who can build a good staff. 

Aside from obvious issues drafting talent, this team has sucked at developing it. 

[ronjon1990]

22 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

I wouldn’t really claim to know what he’s done previous to this stint with the Raiders but this year, with this talent he’s done very well I think. The defence played very well against the Lions and the much vaunted Lions team had chance after chance after chance with our offence continually giving them the ball. I don’t see how anyone could fail to be impressed with that performance given the tools we had to work with. I think it’s disingenuous to say Detroit could have put up 40, we were in that game and with even average QB play I think we’d have been 50/50 to win.

I'm not one to entirely discount missed FGs and turnovers, but we got lucky and forced a fumble at the 3. That score and what should've been a gimme FG makes it a 33 point outing with an extra 5 minutes. I think another TD could've easily been found. 

We gave up a ton of yards and even after our offense had a good long drive, Detroit marched down in short order on us. Credit to the players on the field for making plays, but that's not something consistent or even good. Happy accidents keeping the margins closer are all Graham can rely on to not be blown out. 

And that's been Graham's issue everywhere. IF we get a bunch of turnovers AND the offense scores a bunch of points AND the offense controls the ball and the clock AND the opponent doesn't have their usual outing in terms of efficiency, Graham's scheme and playcalling look good. Yeah? So would mine or yours or anyone's. 

To say it's easy to see a 40-14 game isn't far off, it's literally 3 yards and a couple feet on the FG. The D looks good in comparison to the offense, but not really on their own merits. Even with better QB play on our part, we would've scored more points, yes, but how many more opportunities would Detroit have gotten then? Even when your offense struggles, giving up nearly 500 yards is bad. And that's been a recurring theme under Graham even before our offense bottomed out. Dude is a sham, just maybe not to the degree of McDummy. 

[ronjon1990]

20 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

There will be a lot of time to debate all this. But I really want to see someone who can build a good staff. 

Aside from obvious issues drafting talent, this team has sucked at developing it. 

Agreed wholeheartedly. 

We have units with potential to varying degrees, but a lot have regressed or are simply unproven at this point. No offense to Edgar Bennett, but dude has been around for ages and what does our WR room really have to show for it? 

OL will be important as always. The WRs, we have to get more out of everyone except Meyers (and Adams, but that's going to be a QB/playcall thing). 

RBs, oh boy, what even is Zamir White? We can't really even tell. A few flashes from the RB group, but....a lot of questions. 

The list goes on and on. Hopefully whoever we land at least has ties and/or isn't beholden to a particular way. 

[NickButera]

Bill Cowher. Dark horse. 

[NYRaider]

3 hours ago, big_palooka said:

When googling a list of GM candidates and trying pass it off as "my short list", be sure to check the dates. Ran Carthon is the GM of the Titans right now. You googled a list of 2023 candidates 😂

I did just google a list and looked for guys from top organizations my son, that's who I would consider. You still slurping on JMDZ process like you were all off-season telling us we were dummies for doubting them? 

[NYRaider]

Odds for the Raiders next HC: 

- Ben Johnson (+350)

- Ron Rivera (+400)

- Frank Smith (+425)

- Jim Harbaugh (+750)

- Dan Quinn (+850)

- Raheem Morris (+1000)

- Deion Sanders (+1200)

[NickButera]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Odds for the Raiders next HC: 

- Ben Johnson (+350)

- Ron Rivera (+400)

- Frank Smith (+425)

- Jim Harbaugh (+750)

- Dan Quinn (+850)

- Raheem Morris (+1000)

- Deion Sanders (+1200)

I wouldn't be terribly upset with any of those top 5. God knows what Mark's list is though