Raiders expected to hire Tom Telesco as the GM

[G]

9 hours ago, Jerry said:

I believe AP and Telesco will get at least 2-3 years.  We would be crazy to fire them after this year unless it's like a 1-3 win season.  Even then why fire them?  At least we're setup for a top 5 pick and have a chance to turn things completely around next offseason.  Again, I'd say AP and Telesco have at least two years to get us back on track.

I think AP gets 2-3 and 5 for Telesco. He'll get a chance to pick his own HC. 

[Humble_Beast]

11 hours ago, Darbsk said:

I don’t think unless something unusual happens we’ll suck or be particularly bad. I think we’ll be a very solid team but obviously held back by QB play to a certain extent. The spine of the team is solid now with good weapons, a couple elite DLinemen, some solid vets on D and O and a couple promising youngsters. We’ll likely finish in a similar range to this last season but I we have to give Telesco and Puerce a chance to figure out the QB situation.

I think Pierce is kept if we have similar year to last year or better. If we win 3-6 games for some reason, he is fired with no second thoughts.

Edited May 30 by Humble_Beast

[Jerry]

13 hours ago, G said:

I think AP gets 2-3 and 5 for Telesco. He'll get a chance to pick his own HC. 

I hope he doesn't.  Wasn't the knock on him always picking bad HCs?  The Chargers always seemed like a healthy roster and a competent HC away from competing.  

I do believe he will stick around for 5 years though.  I think we had a really good offseason.  Even though all media outlets believe we had one of the worst off-season's in the NFL.  The only real knock is not finding a QB but what everyone is ignoring is that it's easier said than done.

[big_palooka]

12 minutes ago, Jerry said:

I hope he doesn't.  Wasn't the knock on him always picking bad HCs?  The Chargers always seemed like a healthy roster and a competent HC away from competing.  

I do believe he will stick around for 5 years though.  I think we had a really good offseason.  Even though all media outlets believe we had one of the worst off-season's in the NFL.  The only real knock is not finding a QB but what everyone is ignoring is that it's easier said than done.

The consensus was always that Spanos was cheap on coaching hires. Hence holding onto guys who were way past their expiration dates. 

[Jerry]

23 hours ago, big_palooka said:

The consensus was always that Spanos was cheap on coaching hires. Hence holding onto guys who were way past their expiration dates. 

Thank you for the information.  I don't really follow other teams like that.

[Humble_Beast]

On 5/28/2024 at 12:48 PM, Humble_Beast said:

 Telesco had a very solid and practical off-season:

• Landed a franchise cornerstone (Wilkins) at a position of need. Wilkins is even in his prime and compliments our best players (Maxx)
• Drafted the BPA (Bowers) instead of reaching on need
• Loaded up on the trenches with the next 2 picks on day 2 (JPJ&Glaze). JPJ might have been the BPA at a huge position of need 
• brought back assets coming back off a good year (James, Jenkins, Butler) - all on fair deals. 
• added depth to the OL (Peat T, Whitehair IOL) - better depth then we ever had on OL
• added depth at playmakers= (Mattison, Gallup, Guyton, Bryant)
• Didn't overpay to keep guys (Jacobs, JE)- highly debatable whether to pay a RB. We keep cap flexibility with letting Jacobs walk. I personally don't believe in spending 1sts on RB or spending big on RB. JE walked Giants. Telesco could look like a genius if Zeus and Munford break out. 
• cut the dead weight: Jimmy G, Renfrow, Hoyer, Tillery

-------------------

only questionable moves is keeping Pierce and just adding Minshew at QB. I think both get one shot to earn the job or that's the most obvious area to target in 2025. It makes sense to give Pierce one year to prove himself, all the players love him. We probably draft a QB in 2025 in the 1st. Really solid off-season for Telesco. I could see us adding a starting level CB post 6/1 and maybe DL depth. 

the negatives:

• Faith in Minshew- I thought we had better options to upgrade the QB spot. What's his ceiling? I like the idea of not reaching on a QB in Round1 or trading the farm. I think there were better options. 
• Josh Jacobs- I kinda wish we gave him the same deal the Packers gave him. It's basically a one year deal. Makes sense to bring back your star RB when you don't have a top 10 starting QB. Especially when we have plenty of cap space. 
• OC- This is probably more on the head coach Pierce. Getsy track record is not that good. Let's see how this plays out. 

Hopefully I'm wrong and everything plays out the right way for the Raiders. 

 

Edited June 5 by Humble_Beast

[Darbsk]

1 hour ago, Humble_Beast said:

the negatives:

• Faith in Minshew- I thought we had better options to upgrade the QB spot. What's his ceiling? I like the idea of not reaching on a QB in Round1 or trading the farm. I think there were better options 

 

Who did you have in mind, as you’ve been pushing Trey Lance and Ryan Tannehill and both those are clearly worse than Minshew right now?

[Humble_Beast]

6 hours ago, Darbsk said:

Who did you have in mind, as you’ve been pushing Trey Lance and Ryan Tannehill and both those are clearly worse than Minshew right now?

My first option would have to trade for Justin Fields…. He seemed to be a good fit with the locker room culture. Risky but he would have been my first option. I would have went for Russ, but he was going to Steelers. Little surprising Fields isn’t starting for an NFL team…. 
 

my option B would have been Jameis. I know he can come off as a clown, but he was the first overall pick for a reason. His teammates always ride for him. I think he takes over the Browns, and he could have thrived on this team. He had higher ceiling, and a different tier than Minshew…. 
 

option C

paying Kirk Cousins- I would have preferred Jameis on a prove it deal over Cousins. Cousins overpaid as a 10-15 QB but he’s solid. If we let Jacobs walk, I prolly would have pushed hard for Cousins. 

option D- I would have preferred Darnold over Minshew. Darnold has been bad, but he also has been on bad teams. He has had good games in his career. It’s more risky, but I like the potential. It’s the same tier of player. Trey Lance would have been toss up with Minshew. Lance has done nothing, so it’s completely risky. He was drafted high but got hurt the year he was suppose to start. He’s younger than Nix / Pennix / Rattler. He was raw freak athlete with a cannon of an arm drafted on a win now team. Dak coming off a career year after the team traded for Lance. I would have rolled the dice with a player with more potential. Would have cost a late round pick…..

I probably prefer Minshew over Zach Wilson and Tannehill. Either of those guys wouldn’t have been a bad pick just to add more completion to the QB room. Wilson/Tannehill are desperate attempts to help the team. We are learning why it was so dumb to cut DC. Getting a good QB is hard in the league! 

Edited June 6 by Humble_Beast

[101Raider]

25 minutes ago, Humble_Beast said:

My first option would have to trade for Justin Fields…. He seemed to be a good fit with the locker room culture. Risky but he would have been my first option. I would have went over Russ but he was going to Steelers. Little surprising Fields isn’t starting for an NFL team…. 
 

my option B would have been Jameis. I know he can come off as a clown but was the first overall pick for a reason. His teammates always ride for him. I think he takes over the Browns, and I think he could have thrived on this team. I think he had higher ceiling and a different tier than Minshew…. 
 

option C

paying Kirk Cousins- I would have preferred Jameis on a prove it deal over Cousins. Cousins overpaid as a 10-15 QB but he’s solid. If we let Jacobs walk, I prolly would have pushed hard for Cousins. 
 

option D- I would have preferred Darnold over Minshew. Darnold has been bad but he also has been on bad teams. He has had good games. It’s more risky , but I like the potential. It’s the same tier of player but I would have Darnold. Trey Lance would have been toss up with Minshew. Lance has done nothing so it’s completely risky. He was drafted high and got hurt the year he was suppose to start. He’s younger than Nix / Pennix / Rattler. He was raw freak athlete with a cannon of an arm drafted on a win now team. Dak coming off a career year after the team traded for Lance. I would have rolled the dice with a player with more potential. Would have cost a late round pick…..

 

I probably prefer Minshew over Zach Wilson and Tannehill. Either of those guys wouldn’t have been a bad pick just to add more completion to the QB room. Wilson/Tannehill last ditch desperate attempts to help the team. We are learning why it was so dumb to cut DC. Getting a good QB is hard in the league! 

I honestly prefer Minshew over most of those other options, but I see your thought process behind it and applaud you going out of your way to explain your rationale.

[ronjon1990]

48 minutes ago, Darbsk said:

Who did you have in mind, as you’ve been pushing Trey Lance and Ryan Tannehill and both those are clearly worse than Minshew right now?

I'll follow the assumption that QB was our first choice in the draft and that we were merely seeking a mentor/bridge QB- so Kirk is off the table. 

In order of preference, I would've gone:

Brissett- chose familiarity 

Browning- I don't think Cincy was letting him get away

Mariota- Particularly if we'd kept Kingsbury. I like the schematic fit and Mariota knows a couple of the guys. He catches flack for his Atlanta stint, but look how that entire garbage dump ultimately worked out. I would've taken my ball home too. Better fit with Kingsbury than Getsy, imo, though he probably had a better chance starting here than Washington. 

Minshew- I like Minshew. Totally cool with the signing for what it is. 

Lock- why not? I feel like he's never gotten the absolute opportunity. Denver was a mess and thought they were getting Mr. Unlimited, and Seattle had a guy in place already. Potential may still exist, but he's bottom of my list. 

 

In that case, I think Minshew was the best we could get, and I don't mean that as a knock. Can't complain about Brissett choosing to go back to New England, can't control the Bengals, and Mariota chose the better fit. 

 

Of the guys available, there was no need to throw big money at any of them in our current situation. We weren't looking for a starter, we just missed our shot on draft day. 

I, for one, am glad we didn't go after a Fields or Lance or Winston. We aren't trying to find gold in another's trash. Those are guys you bring on if you want to make a 3 year commitment to give them every shot. They aren't particularly great or proven backups. Minshew is. He can be just a backup QB, and nobody is calling for him to get 2-3 years to prove himself, meaning we're not resigned to QB purgatory. 

The only other moves I may have made:

A. No Minshew, sign Flacco if we were intent on rolling with AOC long term. I think Flacco would be a great mentor for him considering their similar styles. Only problem is Flacco is clearly year to year, if even, and how much can a guy learn in such little time. 

B. I would've sent a 3rd or 4th to Houston for Davis Mills if he was made available. I thought he did a phenomenal job as a rookie given the circumstances. Being benched in favor of CJ Stroud is no major knock. I think Mills, on a decent offense, could be the next Minshew type or even slightly better. 

For me, the Minshew, Flacco, or Mills routes are a 1a, 1b, 1c type of thing though. 

[Darbsk]

11 hours ago, Humble_Beast said:

My first option would have to trade for Justin Fields…. He seemed to be a good fit with the locker room culture. Risky but he would have been my first option. I would have went for Russ, but he was going to Steelers. Little surprising Fields isn’t starting for an NFL team…. 
 

my option B would have been Jameis. I know he can come off as a clown, but he was the first overall pick for a reason. His teammates always ride for him. I think he takes over the Browns, and he could have thrived on this team. He had higher ceiling, and a different tier than Minshew…. 
 

option C

paying Kirk Cousins- I would have preferred Jameis on a prove it deal over Cousins. Cousins overpaid as a 10-15 QB but he’s solid. If we let Jacobs walk, I prolly would have pushed hard for Cousins. 

option D- I would have preferred Darnold over Minshew. Darnold has been bad, but he also has been on bad teams. He has had good games in his career. It’s more risky, but I like the potential. It’s the same tier of player. Trey Lance would have been toss up with Minshew. Lance has done nothing, so it’s completely risky. He was drafted high but got hurt the year he was suppose to start. He’s younger than Nix / Pennix / Rattler. He was raw freak athlete with a cannon of an arm drafted on a win now team. Dak coming off a career year after the team traded for Lance. I would have rolled the dice with a player with more potential. Would have cost a late round pick…..

I probably prefer Minshew over Zach Wilson and Tannehill. Either of those guys wouldn’t have been a bad pick just to add more completion to the QB room. Wilson/Tannehill are desperate attempts to help the team. We are learning why it was so dumb to cut DC. Getting a good QB is hard in the league! 

Appreciate the explanations, always like to hear not just what someone is thinking but why too.

With regards to those options, Cousins is the only one I feel would have for sure been better than what we have now, and that was still a big risk giving a large contract to an ageing vet coming off a major injury and a guy who’s hovered about the top 10 or 12 QB spot without ever being great.

Fields is an interesting one and an option I could have been on board with for a 5th round pick or so. The questions I have is, if we employ Luke Getsy and they don’t bring him in is that an indictment on Fields or does Fields not want to work with Getsy again? Not great either way. Honestly, I think Fields probably will not work out and we’ve already got O’Connell in house who the FO might feel has more potential. And we only have a finite amount of resources to improve young players. 

Winston, Lance and Darnold for me would not have been options. Don’t like Winston the fit and Darnold and Lance are just really poor imho. The realistic option I’d have probably looked at over Minshew would have been Brissett, you know what he is, dependable vet backup who can start. Agree with @ronjon1990 that Flacco would have been a great mentor type but that’s if you’re intent on rolling with O’Connell.

It seems a bit strange to me that pretty much everyone wants to write O’Connell off after half a season as a rookie but give guys like Lance chance after chance after looking much worse. Probably the current zeitgeist of the running QB effect.

 

[ronjon1990]

5 hours ago, Darbsk said:

It seems a bit strange to me that pretty much everyone wants to write O’Connell off after half a season as a rookie but give guys like Lance chance after chance after looking much worse. Probably the current zeitgeist of the running QB effect.

 

Lance is the perfect example of why you don't break the bank to draft a guy with "tools". 

When people go gaga over tools, ot reminds me of late Al Davis and H/W/S scouting WRs. 

At some point, you gotta sit down and say "Ok, we're dealing with world class athletes up and down the roster, this guy hasn't shown he can play football worth a damn."

Everyone thinks this or that "raw tools" guy is the next Josh Allen and you just gotta spend enough XP to unlock it. 

Anyone other than Kyle Shanahan or Andy Reid pulls a stunt like the 49ers did with Lance would be fired. 

All the analytics in the world can't replace the same question of "Is he good at football?". Gotta keep the PFF bros employed though, I guess lol. 

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

Lance is the perfect example of why you don't break the bank to draft a guy with "tools". 

When people go gaga over tools, ot reminds me of late Al Davis and H/W/S scouting WRs. 

At some point, you gotta sit down and say "Ok, we're dealing with world class athletes up and down the roster, this guy hasn't shown he can play football worth a damn."

Everyone thinks this or that "raw tools" guy is the next Josh Allen and you just gotta spend enough XP to unlock it. 

Anyone other than Kyle Shanahan or Andy Reid pulls a stunt like the 49ers did with Lance would be fired. 

All the analytics in the world can't replace the same question of "Is he good at football?". Gotta keep the PFF bros employed though, I guess lol. 

Unfortunately, it's a sign of the times. QB is the most valuable position on the field. The teams that make the playoffs consistently have franchise QBs. We live in a time when guys who used to be considered developmental prospects and taken day 3 are not getting pushed to round 1 and higher. Blame the rookie salary cap maybe? You can roll the dice now more than ever on raw traits and trust your coaches to develop the rest of their games. And teams are desperate as this latest class showed us.

I don't see this trend ending anytime soon unfortunately. And it sucks to be one of those teams that desperately needs a franchise QB. 

 

[ronjon1990]

2 hours ago, big_palooka said:

I don't see this trend ending anytime soon unfortunately. And it sucks to be one of those teams that desperately needs a franchise QB. 

 

No kidding. 

Over the last few years, probably going back to around 2018 since any further back I only sort of remember how I felt/skewed by exposure, the list of QBs I've genuinely been excited about is about as short as could be. 

2018: Rosen. I thought he would at least be decent; Allen- even I can appreciate that level of raw talent and his circumstances

2019: Nobody

2020: Burrow. I was a bit worried he was a 1 hit wonder, but I watched him in person a few tines and could buy his hype. 

2021: Nobody. 

2022: Nobody.

2023: Nobody. 

2024: Penix, I was high on him. McCarthy. 

5 QBs over the last 7 cycles to be genuinely excited about is rough, especially when QB hasn't always even been my #1 need. 

[Bitty 2.0]

On 5/30/2024 at 12:21 AM, Humble_Beast said:

I think Pierce is kept if we have similar year to last year or better. If we win 3-6 games for some reason, he is fired with no second thoughts.

Is tricky with AP because the players love him, they have to get sick of him or there going to revolt