Justwinning Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 15 minutes ago, NCOUGHMAN said: And we did it without arguably our best olineman, starting rb, starting te iirc. And we had our third string qb and a oc who’s got a handful of games under his belt. And with the mf people here love to hate pierce as hc. Crazy how they can’t enjoy a W from their supposed favorite team. It’s always something negative even when there’s something to be positive. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich7sena Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Justwinning said: Crazy how they can’t enjoy a W from their supposed favorite team. It’s always something negative even when there’s something to be positive. You're celebrating a win from Christmas, against a team who just won the Super Bowl, on Valentine's day. Anyways, quarterbacks. Edited February 14 by Rich7sena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCOUGHMAN Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 25 minutes ago, Justwinning said: Crazy how they can’t enjoy a W from their supposed favorite team. It’s always something negative even when there’s something to be positive. It’s not even celebrating atp it’s just acknowledging that we won that game honestly. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbsk Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Rich7sena said: They didn't. They obviously didn't. And that was due in part to the Raiders, a team can only play as well as the opposition lets them on times. The Chiefs can underestimate us plus we can play well, they are not mutually exclusive. Credit to the Raiders for a good win. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justwinning Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Rich7sena said: You're celebrating a win from Christmas, against a team who just won the Super Bowl, on Valentine's day. Anyways, quarterbacks. I look at it as something to build off of considering we did not have our team at full strength whatsoever. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbsk Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 7 hours ago, Justwinning said: I look at it as something to build off of considering we did not have our team at full strength whatsoever. I agree. I don’t think anyone is ‘celebrating’, but it is noteworthy and as you say, something to build off of and a benchmark moving forward. This team know they can beat the Chiefs now, they’ve given themselves a blueprint. The Chiefs will in all likelihood be better next time we face them but then again, if the off season goes to plan we’ll be better too. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raidr4life Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 On 2/14/2024 at 9:41 AM, RaiderX said: This is why a fanbase is a joke at times. At this point you gotta realize it was the Chiefs shooting themselves in the foot a lot of that game. Defense made plays but this was just like the Jets game. The joke is on you, the defense was beating Maholmes azz all day, they didn't shoot themselves in the foot, they got whooped and they knew it. Did you see any dropped passes or fumbles by their offense? Nope Mahomes was under duress all game and that's how you beat him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaiderX Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 On 2/14/2024 at 10:04 AM, Justwinning said: Awful take. The Raiders were hungrier and made more plays than the Chiefs. Contrary to popular belief, you are allowed to give credit to the Raiders. Awful response. I did give the defense credit. Offense put up 6 points. You can't win games without a combo of defense and the other team shooting themselves in the foot like that. The defense got lit up by a lesser offense the next week that didn't shoot themselves in the foot. My main point is they're making more out of this than it really is. You said yourself the Chiefs came in lazy for that game. Reality is the team has lost to Mahomes has a 10-2 record vs the Raiders and the fanbase continues to pin these wins as trophies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raidr4life Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 2 hours ago, RaiderX said: Awful response. I did give the defense credit. Offense put up 6 points. You can't win games without a combo of defense and the other team shooting themselves in the foot like that. The defense got lit up by a lesser offense the next week that didn't shoot themselves in the foot. My main point is they're making more out of this than it really is. You said yourself the Chiefs came in lazy for that game. Reality is the team has lost to Mahomes has a 10-2 record vs the Raiders and the fanbase continues to pin these wins as trophies. Who cares if the offense only scored 6 points, the defense kept them from scoring more and caused turnovers and scored, that's not KC shooting themselves in the foot, that next week our defense didn't get pressure, had lapses in the secondary so they got beat. I mean everytime you lose at something is it you shooting yourself in the foot or you just got beat that day. The defense dominated that day it's that simple Mahomes tears are proof of that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chali21 Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 On 2/14/2024 at 9:41 AM, RaiderX said: This is why a fanbase is a joke at times. At this point you gotta realize it was the Chiefs shooting themselves in the foot a lot of that game. Defense made plays but this was just like the Jets game. The last QB to beat them…who didn’t throw a pass in the last 3 quarters of the game. Come to think of it I actually did the same thing in madden a few weeks ago. Either way I think AOC would be a good backup but not starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Sign Kirk Cousins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 8 hours ago, NYRaider said: Sign Kirk Cousins No. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Jerry said: No. Only option that gives you a chance to be competitive next year without leveraging our premium draft capital for the next 3 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chali21 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 12 hours ago, NYRaider said: Only option that gives you a chance to be competitive next year without leveraging our premium draft capital for the next 3 seasons. Nope just the salary cap for the next 3 years. I’d rather build up the trenches with that money and try to get a guy in the draft. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaidersAreOne Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 A potential Justin Fields package: https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/draft2024/insider/story/_/id/39562876/nfl-trade-offers-chicago-bears-top-2024-draft-pick-justin-fields-caleb-williams Quote Las Vegas Raiders Yates' trade package: 2024 third-round pick, WR Hunter Renfrow A more straightforward offer of the Raiders' second-rounder (No. 44) was there for the taking, but let's have a little more fun. The Raiders are in clear need of a quarterback -- Jimmy Garoppolo was benched during the season, and Aidan O'Connell hasn't shown enough to be the only option under center for coach Antonio Pierce -- but their first-round choices at No. 13 might be limited. Fields would give Las Vegas some stability. And while Renfrow is likely otherwise a cap casualty for Las Vegas, he posted 103 catches and 1,038 yards in 2021, and could help Chicago on offense. The Bears' leader in slot receiver snaps last season was Darnell Mooney, a soon-to-be free agent. As part of the deal, I'd suggest a renegotiated contract for Renfrow. Let's say one year and up to $7 million with incentives (including $3 million guaranteed). After hiring Luke Getsy (formerly the Bears' offensive coordinator) as their offensive coordinator, no other team has a better snapshot of what Fields brings than the Raiders. Getsy's opinion surely would influence the viability of a deal like this getting done. Cronin's Bears spin: I'm not convinced a reunion of Fields and Getsy is realistic, and the fact that many of Fields' shortcomings ultimately fall on the OC who was tasked with developing him might make this a nonstarter. Heck, the Raiders hiring Getsy after he was fired by Chicago would lead you to believe that the organization sees Fields as the issue, rather than their new offensive coordinator. But even aside from that, the Bears still don't come away with a second-round pick in this scenario, unlike the offers from Pittsburgh and Atlanta. Additionally, Renfrow's past two seasons have been similar in production to what Chicago has gotten from Mooney. The additional $21.5 million that the Bears just earned in cap savings by releasing Eddie Jackson and Cody Whitehair gives Chicago an estimated $55 million in effective cap space to upgrade at wide receiver in free agency, which includes the likes of Tee Higgins, Mike Evans and Michael Pittman Jr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.