The Jon Gruden Thread, Man

[Rich7sena]

15 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

McDonald shouldn't be on an NFL roster. 

I think we're all kidding ourselves if you think Reggie is going to be a around long. He built this roster..... now he's going to "collaborate" in tearing it down? 

Do you think Reggie is happy with the current roster? He's cut under-performing players he's signed before. Further, the roster is a bad one, it's just not "good enough" to be a consistent playoff contender.

[NightTrainLane]

20 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

McDonald shouldn't be on an NFL roster. 

I think we're all kidding ourselves if you think Reggie is going to be a around long. He built this roster..... now he's going to "collaborate" in tearing it down? 

I tired of seeing stuff like this. McDonald was a 7th rd pick and a fringe roster guy. Just because he got pressed into service this year doesn't mean he doesn't belong on a roster. EVERY TEAM  has these guys on the end of their roster.

[NightTrainLane]

Reggie isn't going any where.

Edited February 6, 2018 by NightTrainLane

[holyghost]

17 minutes ago, NightTrainLane said:

I tired of seeing stuff like this. McDonald was a 7th rd pick and a fringe roster guy. Just because he got pressed into service this year doesn't mean he doesn't belong on a roster. EVERY TEAM  has these guys on the end of their roster.

Yes, every team has guys like this. But I disagree. They couldn't see in 3 years of games and practice that he couldn't perform? We're not talking about some 7th round or undrafted rookie or even a 2nd year guy. In 3 years a team should have cycled out someone like McDonald. It was a chronic issue with the previous staff to cling to some of their adopted projects even though they showed no signs of capacity to perform. Alexander is a decent example. So is McGill. These guys have showed no real signs of development. So when the staff preaches competition, why does it seem that is not rigidly and consistently applied? 

Furthermore, I think it's a hallmark of the Raider fan to rationalize this sort of thing. A thing that is consistent with a team that has been bottom of the league for a decade and a half, and unsuccessful for almost 4 decades now. Think about that. What the Raiders do is not the right thing to do, clearly. Any number of players the Raiders put into service go on to wash directly out of the league, and most fans can see that while they're here, they cannot perform on an adequate level. Yet for whatever reason they are able to stick around Oakland.

I for one do not want to see the Raiders be the gravy train for the underperformers of the NFL any longer. McDonald may belong on some team, but not on this one if they want to excel. 

[oakdb36]

Players at the bottom of any roster are cheap (on rookie contracts). McDonald stuck around because no rookie was able to take his spot. No one is going to sign a FA to be the 5th CB because it's more expensive. And no GM is going into a draft specifically looking for an upgrade to the 5th CB. McDonald has one year left on his contract so he'll make it to camp and compete (with some day 3 pick and/or UDFAs) to make the final roster again.

I'm pretty sure a majority of the backups in the NFL make poor starters. It's not a Raider issue.

[big_palooka]

1 hour ago, oakdb36 said:

It's not a teardown. The building blocks aren't going anywhere.

Carr, Mack, KO, Hudson, Amari, Conley - those are the building blocks. The rest of this roster could be turned over honestly. 

[big_palooka]

56 minutes ago, NightTrainLane said:

I tired of seeing stuff like this. McDonald was a 7th rd pick and a fringe roster guy. Just because he got pressed into service this year doesn't mean he doesn't belong on a roster. EVERY TEAM  has these guys on the end of their roster.

Points to a bigger issue. Recognizing CB talent. Since Reggie has been here, he's been completely inept at signing or drafting quality CB play and depth. 

[big_palooka]

32 minutes ago, holyghost said:

Yes, every team has guys like this. But I disagree. They couldn't see in 3 years of games and practice that he couldn't perform? We're not talking about some 7th round or undrafted rookie or even a 2nd year guy. In 3 years a team should have cycled out someone like McDonald. It was a chronic issue with the previous staff to cling to some of their adopted projects even though they showed no signs of capacity to perform. Alexander is a decent example. So is McGill. These guys have showed no real signs of development. So when the staff preaches competition, why does it seem that is not rigidly and consistently applied? 

Furthermore, I think it's a hallmark of the Raider fan to rationalize this sort of thing. A thing that is consistent with a team that has been bottom of the league for a decade and a half, and unsuccessful for almost 4 decades now. Think about that. What the Raiders do is not the right thing to do, clearly. Any number of players the Raiders put into service go on to wash directly out of the league, and most fans can see that while they're here, they cannot perform on an adequate level. Yet for whatever reason they are able to stick around Oakland.

I for one do not want to see the Raiders be the gravy train for the underperformers of the NFL any longer. McDonald may belong on some team, but not on this one if they want to excel. 

Well said. Reggie has a tendency to hold onto these types well past their expiration dates. Alexander, McGill are other good examples. They can't play, but you let them hang around the bottom of the roster. They are not even good ST players, let alone quality depth players that can fill in. Again.... shouldn't be on the roster. 

[NightTrainLane]

22 minutes ago, holyghost said:

Yes, every team has guys like this. But I disagree. They couldn't see in 3 years of games and practice that he couldn't perform? We're not talking about some 7th round or undrafted rookie or even a 2nd year guy. In 3 years a team should have cycled out someone like McDonald. It was a chronic issue with the previous staff to cling to some of their adopted projects even though they showed no signs of capacity to perform. Alexander is a decent example. So is McGill. These guys have showed no real signs of development. So when the staff preaches competition, why does it seem that is not rigidly and consistently applied? 

Furthermore, I think it's a hallmark of the Raider fan to rationalize this sort of thing. A thing that is consistent with a team that has been bottom of the league for a decade and a half, and unsuccessful for almost 4 decades now. Think about that. What the Raiders do is not the right thing to do, clearly. Any number of players the Raiders put into service go on to wash directly out of the league, and most fans can see that while they're here, they cannot perform on an adequate level. Yet for whatever reason they are able to stick around Oakland.

I for one do not want to see the Raiders be the gravy train for the underperformers of the NFL any longer. McDonald may belong on some team, but not on this one if they want to excel. 

I don't think that he couldn't perform though. He isn't starter level but he did make some plays. The team brought in several draft picks, UDFA and tryouts to take his positions at different points and he beat them all out. I understand wanting to be better but have to work with the best you have. If someone had been selected that was a better option than McDonald his place as a 7th rd pick was saved or special. Injuries really shown a light on it this year in the secondary where we played many games without our top 1-4 corners at different times.

Your comment about players washing out is the same across the nfl. It was noted earlier this year when someone charted the draft picks under Reggie and where they are now and then charted our divsion rivals and it showed the same number of failed picks, wash outs and guys that moved on to other rosters.

Look, I'm with you. I want to be better in all phases. From the draft, to development, to coaching and finally results on the field. All those things need to be better and we all want that. But pointing to this one aspect and saying it's raider fans rationalizing because they are use to bad play isn't an accurate assessment IMO.

[NightTrainLane]

7 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Points to a bigger issue. Recognizing CB talent. Since Reggie has been here, he's been completely inept at signing or drafting quality CB play and depth. 

We could go round robin all day with this nonsense.

Corner talent, LB emphasis, Dline development, skill player consist production...

The front office isn't perfect by any means, but they have done a great job at building the foundation of a good team and making sure that it can be sustained through smart contracts. Now the time for the next phase where we shore up the roster and start to compete with the big boys.

It's clear you don't like Reggie but that is who we are going to war with. Hopefully with the Gruden in house and them working together the mix is right to take the next steps.

 

[big_palooka]

One of my biggest gripes with Reggie. He's to tight with his draft picks and "coach em up" mentality. It's the GB model that finally collapsed around Ted Thompson. One injury and you're replacing a player with some fridge roster player. Late round pick or URFA type. Not quality depth.

Good teams use their draft picks smart. Reggie relies to heavily on the draft and treats picks as gold (Ted Thompson influence). While teams out there like the Eagles see a need at RB and CB make the moves to secure young talents on rookie contracts to fill gaps. 

Those mid-round picks are a crap shoot. If you can find a scheme fit for cheap that doesn't fit with his current team, make those moves.

[big_palooka]

2 minutes ago, NightTrainLane said:

We could go round robin all day with this nonsense.

Corner talent, LB emphasis, Dline development, skill player consist production...

The front office isn't perfect by any means, but they have done a great job at building the foundation of a good team and making sure that it can be sustained through smart contracts. Now the time for the next phase where we shore up the roster and start to compete with the big boys.

It's clear you don't like Reggie but that is who we are going to war with. Hopefully with the Gruden in house and them working together the mix is right to take the next steps.

 

On the contrary.... I've been a big Reggie supporter. Preached patience since day 1. But he's not above scrutiny. His roster sucks. He's missed massively on high draft picks. Won't look at trade options to improve and keeps bums like Roberts, McDonald, etc. employed. 

As a talent evaluator.... he really needs to knock this offseason/draft out of the park or he won't be back in 2019. 

[oakdb36]

They've done a poor job building the defense. 6 years later and we have one stand-out on that side of the ball.

[NightTrainLane]

27 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

On the contrary.... I've been a big Reggie supporter. Preached patience since day 1. But he's not above scrutiny. His roster sucks. He's missed massively on high draft picks. Won't look at trade options to improve and keeps bums like Roberts, McDonald, etc. employed. 

As a talent evaluator.... he really needs to knock this offseason/draft out of the park or he won't be back in 2019. 

How do you know he won't look at trade options? When you're justifications are assumptions and you don't look at the whole picture of why a roster is the way it is and just put it on the talent evaluator then there isn't much to discuss.

I also have said the same things about patience and Reggie and staff not being perfect from the beginning.

Reggie will be here til 2020 when his contract is up. Whether we resign him we be up to the owner.

[holyghost]

Listen, I'm a supporter of McKenzie. But it seems something about the overall plan went astray these past 2 years. Prior to that I gave him a pass on the first couple of drafts because it appeared he had to entirely modernize a scouting department. That can take time, I get it. Plus he has had some responsibilities that go way beyond a typical GM job. In some ways he has been in charge of an entire organizational rebuild the likes of an expansion franchise. He should have had or should have advocated for a partner in this in terms of logistics. A team president, director of blah blah, something. Someone to take some burden off. Overhauling business side, the things like the team facility, scouting dept. rebuild and so on. It's unfair to expect one guy to be a master of all these phases and then do so expediently as well.

Alas, 2014 comes and we all get the great feeling that it is bearing fruit. The concern at that time was putting it back together into a winner, getting real talent. Getting top talent. It is in fact easier to tear down than to build well. He tore it down beautifully. Then in 2014 he started putting it back together beautifully. I was seeing the right cuts, the right new players, the right attitude and locker room. 2015 wasn't as good, but still yielded progression. Not talking in terms of on field successes, but building the right way.

Something in the past two drafts and offseasons has gone off course. Now we're picking guys with issues in the 1st round, signing guys with circus shows. Last offseason was frought with issues. Every team with a plethora of offseason drama and issues goes to the dogs. Drafting guys for 2 years who end up contributing nothing at all. I do not like the past two drafts and the past two offseasons. And I don't know how we went from a Gabe Jackson in the 3rd to an Eddie Vanderdoes or Shilique Calhoun. Or how we went from quickly jettisoning crap scholarship guys to all of a sudden now we've been accumulating them again for the past 2/3 years.  It is as if we're gravitating slowly back to the old dysfunctional Raiders we all enjoyed the end of. 

Whether it was Del Rio's input, or some other problem, I just want McKenzie to get back on the course they seemed to be on. If that means shifting the philosophy to maybe trading up, targeting key players, another way of doing things, then he has to adapt. We can't exist on the model of piling drafted guys and developing them to fit and fill endlessly. Because that model is largely based on the coaching staff and system being utterly stable and consistent, and excelling. So it seems to me the philosophy of team building of the last two years didn't mesh. 

McKenzie adapted really well the first 3+ years, somewhere along the line it stopped. Don't know whose fault it is, I just want to see it back on the track it was on for the first 3 years. Whoever was responsible for that plan needs to be running today's plan. 

Edited February 6, 2018 by holyghost