Thursday Night Football: Chargers (5-8) @ Raiders (5-8) - Why do schedule makers hate us?

[Towerbridge]

3 hours ago, iknowcool said:

Chargers have lost 4 fumbles? That has to be close to a record 

You serious? Not even close

[ET80]

Just woke up. Staley wasn't fired last night? Why not?

[Ryan_W]

casual box score scouter checking in

good game huh?

[Manny/Patrick]

It’s 1:44am rn in cali, if I wake up in 6 hours and Staley isn’t fired I’m breaking things

[Nightmare]

4 hours ago, game3525 said:

This would require Dean Spanos to actually pay top dollar for a coach.

I think this is the key issue with who the Chargers get as their next HC.

People speculating they'll trade for Belichick or go after Harbaugh are probably going to be disappointed. That would require Spanos to do something he's never done before, which is pay the going rate for a top Head Coach. He just doesn't do it.

Maybe the likes of last night have embarrassed him enough that he might finally go there - but I'd say more likely LAC are looking at another young coordinator as a first-time coach. Which isn't the worst thing in the world because there are plenty of good prospects out there like that. Staley just wasn't one of them.

[Tank4Drake]

4 hours ago, Towerbridge said:

People said the Raiders have no talent on defense yet they are ranked in the top 10 of scoring defense 

Maxx Crosby carrying these skeletons to a Top 10 D. He is easily DPOY imo.

[HerbertGOAT]

Hopefully everybody truly understands now. If they don't, they will next week when it's 56-7.

Anybody keeping Herbert out of their top 5-6 because "he just can't get it done" is arguing in bad faith.

He has been saddled with the worst ownership and GM in the NFL.

I hesitate to call Staley the worst coach in the NFL, because even though he is bad, the Spanos are some of the most meddling owners and are likely constricting his own roster building. He's not the answer, but God the problem runs so, so much deeper than just our 3rd first-time HC in a row.

[adamq]

3 hours ago, Manny/Patrick said:

It’s 1:44am rn in cali, if I wake up in 6 hours and Staley isn’t fired I’m breaking things

It's 7 45 and I've got bad news for you.   The Chargers brass probably knows that keeping BS around actually gives them a better chance at losing out and getting a decent draft pick 

[Danger]

Staley has to be getting fired today right?

[MikeT14]

2 minutes ago, Danger said:

Staley has to be getting fired today right?

There's no way he doesn't. No surprise if I am proven wrong, but you HAVE to.

[ET80]

I don't know which is worse for Staley - getting fired in the next 1-3 days or having to be in the building for the next four weeks, trying to look people in the eye after that one.

[WheatieMan]

Staley should just do the Greg Kinnear dance at the end of the movie Little Miss Sunshine, because who gives a **** at this point.

[Nightmare]

2 minutes ago, ET80 said:

I don't know which is worse for Staley - getting fired in the next 1-3 days or having to be in the building for the next four weeks, trying to look people in the eye after that one.

Yep. It's kind of like where the Raiders were with McDaniels earlier in the season.

The simplistic view is that you keep the Head Coach around because your season is going nowhere anyway and by doing so you'll land yourself a better draft pick - but I do think it gets to a certain point where the negative influence of the lame duck HC becomes so awkward that it goes from incompetency to toxicity. You're potentially damaging the confidence and development of young players by keeping around a guy/staff who are so obviously unfit for the position.

[Jakuvious]

6 minutes ago, Nightmare said:

Yep. It's kind of like where the Raiders were with McDaniels earlier in the season.

The simplistic view is that you keep the Head Coach around because your season is going nowhere anyway and by doing so you'll land yourself a better draft pick - but I do think it gets to a certain point where the negative influence of the lame duck HC becomes so awkward that it goes from incompetency to toxicity. You're potentially damaging the confidence and development of young players by keeping around a guy/staff who are so obviously unfit for the position.

Yeah, I remember the Chiefs getting to the same kind of point with Todd Haley. Season was already over, Romeo Crennell wound up being just as bad performance wise, but things had gotten so toxic with Haley just around that you had to move on just to restore some faith and confidence in the players that you still wanted to be bought in and around in a year or two.

[ET80]

13 minutes ago, Nightmare said:

Yep. It's kind of like where the Raiders were with McDaniels earlier in the season.

The simplistic view is that you keep the Head Coach around because your season is going nowhere anyway and by doing so you'll land yourself a better draft pick - but I do think it gets to a certain point where the negative influence of the lame duck HC becomes so awkward that it goes from incompetency to toxicity. You're potentially damaging the confidence and development of young players by keeping around a guy/staff who are so obviously unfit for the position.

Only downside to this is a Lovie Smith situation - where you end up against someone else who is tanking and your lame duck goes out and wins out of spite.

It worked out for the Texans - they ended up with the better QB at 2 - but that's moreso thanks to Carolina taking Bryce. Houston sort of bumbled their way into a good situation.