AP names Gardner Minshew starting QB

[ronjon1990]

4 hours ago, big_palooka said:

I see it as a lateral move. Different styles, but neither add anything to the end result. 

This is my biggest concern. 

When the rah ran stops working and the losses pile up, what do we ultimately risk? 

AP ain't Dan Campbell. We don't have a QB that was arguably an underappreciated Pro Bowl level QB in his own right to show some real spark. We don't have a Ben Johnson on staff. And we haven't been Detroit level garbage for a while. 

A lot of things worked in Campbell's favor when the early going was rough and ugly. It was 100% an organizational rebuild. 

We have guys who expected to carry on from a ridiculously improbable playoff push now looking at yet another lost season and overall regression. We have guys who came here expecting something vastly different than what we now are. 

I don't think AP has the rah rah tread Campbell or even JDR had. We flop early, it could get all sorts of fugly on and off the field. I get the feeling that, despite what any player says, our stars are just praying to not get embarrassed again and crossing fingers that the more likely outcome doesn't come to pass. 

[NYRaider]

6 hours ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

Meh I see it as

ap upgrade over jmd 

gardner upgrade over jimmy/ aoc

getsy upgrade over Lombardi

So no excuses to win less than 9-10 games and make the playoffs

[NYRaider]

4 hours ago, bucksavage1 said:

That’s a great point. We upgraded across the team 

 

Wilkins upgrade over Nichols

Jones upgrade over Peters

Bowers upgrade over Hooper

Agreed. If AP can't get to this upgraded team to the playoffs after 8 wins last year, he just isn't the guy.

[NCOUGHMAN]

33 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

So no excuses to win less than 9-10 games and make the playoffs

I’ll say this. no excuses for us not to win more games than we did last year 

[NYRaider]

1 hour ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

I’ll say this. no excuses for us not to win more games than we did last year 

So 9 wins should be the minimum 

[NCOUGHMAN]

19 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

So 9 wins should be the minimum 

I forgot what our record was last year.
 

I don’t do excuses gard dogg is a vet and this is likely his last chance to show he can be qb1. He’s not a rookie plus he has a decent offense around him. Plus a decent defense. 

[bucksavage1]

3 hours ago, NYRaider said:

Agreed. If AP can't get to this upgraded team to the playoffs after 8 wins last year, he just isn't the guy.

Based off the way we finished last season, we should win at minimum 9 games if we stay healthy . We should of won 9 games the year before too

 

[G]

On 8/19/2024 at 9:51 AM, big_palooka said:

Why? He's a journeyman QB, it's year 6. You know exactly what you are getting. Why would surprise anyone now?

Rich Gannon was similar. Journeyman who did good right before becoming GREAT for US. I know I'm dreaming but I'm hoping for a Doug Flutie kind of effect. 

[big_palooka]

9 hours ago, bucksavage1 said:

Based off the way we finished last season, we should win at minimum 9 games if we stay healthy . We should of won 9 games the year before too

 

Why? The variables are not the same. Putting aside the difference in schedule, interim coaches always get an emotional boost. Players like playing for a positional coach, especially when they hated the HC they were playing for.

That emotional run is long over, it's a new season. A new grind. 

While Graham's defense should be solid, the team will go only as far as it can take them. On the other side, you have a career backup starting  at QB and Luke Getsy who couldn't build an offense in Chicago over two seasons. Fields aside, his offense was messy. It was hit or miss, it had issues with spacing and doing anything consistently. 

The Raiders have the 9th hardest SOS entering the season and the Vegas odds have them at 6.5. The only way this team is winning 9 games is if Getsy somehow surprises everyone with his offense and shows it was in fact a Fields problem in Chicago. 

 

 

[big_palooka]

5 hours ago, G said:

Rich Gannon was similar. Journeyman who did good right before becoming GREAT for US. I know I'm dreaming but I'm hoping for a Doug Flutie kind of effect. 

I mean... I'm hoping so to, but that over 20 years ago. A QB hasn't replicated that kinds of career renaissance in this modern age. The game is different now. QBs have it easier and we are flooded with information on them.

[Bitty 2.0]

On 8/22/2024 at 9:37 AM, RaidersAreOne said:

I don't see this QB room winning us games. I think our team build is a very strong D, physical run game and conservative passing game aimed not to turnover the ball.

He may make some wow plays with his legs to keep us in games, but his accuracy and history of taking unnecessary sacks will keep us out of a lot too.

I think we'll win 6-7 games with him at the helm personally.

It’s all about the YAC yards, if the TEs can get going early in the season we’ll have a good offense

[NCOUGHMAN]

6 hours ago, big_palooka said:

Why? The variables are not the same. Putting aside the difference in schedule, interim coaches always get an emotional boost. Players like playing for a positional coach, especially when they hated the HC they were playing for.

That emotional run is long over, it's a new season. A new grind. 

While Graham's defense should be solid, the team will go only as far as it can take them. On the other side, you have a career backup starting  at QB and Luke Getsy who couldn't build an offense in Chicago over two seasons. Fields aside, his offense was messy. It was hit or miss, it had issues with spacing and doing anything consistently. 

The Raiders have the 9th hardest SOS entering the season and the Vegas odds have them at 6.5. The only way this team is winning 9 games is if Getsy somehow surprises everyone with his offense and shows it was in fact a Fields problem in Chicago. 

 

 

You don’t know the variables the season hasn’t even started yet 

[Jeremy408]

Personally when it comes to Gardner it wouldnt suprise me either way.

If he ends up getting benched week for it wouldn't surprise me. But if he ends up becoming comeback player of the year I can see the pathway to that. Contrary to popular belief, it is actually happened quite a few times in our recent history.

• Geno Smith bounced around the league and was much older before barely winning the Seahawks job out of camp because though they want to Drew Locke to win the job he got Covid for most of preseason and then came back and threw two interceptions.  One thing that most people forget that Geno Smith was horrible that preseason also. 
• Baker Mayfield appears to have revived his career with the Buccaneers after being horrible for the Panthers which was after being basically a game manager for the Browns(those some people would call that a success because he was drafted number one overall and they went to the playoffs so everything's magnified)

The other aspect of this that I think kind of gets ignored(due to the fact that after Gardner's second year they drafted Trevor Lawrence so he must've been bad) gardeners never really had a bad season where he throws a bunch of interceptions and he's like just as horrible player(specially with this kind of stigma that he's a turnover machine).

His rookie year(12 games) he threw  60.6cmp 3,271yds 7.0 Att 21tds 6ints

His 2nd year(8 games) he threw  66.6cmp 2,259yds 6.9 Att 16tds 5ints(which are actually good stats if you only played nine games)

Now this is where the whole narrative thing starts. That year they were horrible enough to get the number one overall pick in which if your team is that sorry and you're starting quarterback was a fifth round pick and you can get one Manny considered a generational talent you do that. He was traded to a team where the QB was settled. 

His 3rd year(2 games) he threw  68.3cmp 439yds 7.3 Att 4tds 1ints(which are pretty decent stats if you only played 4 games). That said, he was a backup in and offense designed for a run first Qb

His 4th year(2 games) he threw  57.9cmp 663yds 7.3 Att 5tds 5ints(which is why I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't pan out) But again, he was a backup in and offense designed for a run first Qb

His 5th year(13 games) he threw  62.2cmp 3,305yds 6.7 Att 15tds 9ints(which is why I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't pan out) But like philly, he was a backup in and offense designed for a run first Qb. That said there was more time to modifiy the offense to his strengths. Even with that, none of the offensive rosters(other than the Eagles) are as good as the Raiders. 

So it can go either way and theres evidence for both. 

[big_palooka]

11 minutes ago, NCOUGHMAN said:

You don’t know the variables the season hasn’t even started yet 

That was my point. The variables will be different than last year. Obviously we don't know what those are, but we know we don't get Brandon Staley twice a year or Russel Wilson. 

[NCOUGHMAN]

1 hour ago, big_palooka said:

That was my point. The variables will be different than last year. Obviously we don't know what those are, but we know we don't get Brandon Staley twice a year or Russel Wilson. 

Only team I’m cautious about in our division is kc