LANE KIFFIN NEW RAIDERS HEAD COACH?IS AL DAVIS SERIOUS?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

WILL LAN KIFFIN HELP RAIDERSMAKE IT TO THE PLAYOFFS?


  • Total voters
    65

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
thascary1 said:
did you even read the trade???

you would give up Moss and #1 for an established o-line and another high #1.

This wouldn't be a bad move for Oakland at all, they trade a player who doesn't want to be there for a player of NEED...they get rid of the #1 overall pick and the huge cap hit for another top player with a lower cap figure.


Makes complete sense!
Yeah I read the trade. Makes sense for a Broncos fan... And what do you mean by established o-line? You mean a lineman? I still wouldn't do that. The Raiders will find a way to sign the number one pick if they decide to draft someone with it. With JaMarcus sitting there I wouldn't pass him up. The o-line can be fixed with a new blocking scheme, better play calling, and a few free agents here and there. I wouldn't trade my number one pick for someone else's and a linemen if that's what you're saying. I'd let Moss go for whatever I could get for him. I'd trade him for a proven offensive lineman.... but I wouldn't package a deal with Moss and the number one pick. Giving too much away.
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
Yeah I read the trade. Makes sense for a Broncos fan... And what do you mean by established o-line? You mean a lineman? I still wouldn't do that. The Raiders will find a way to sign the number one pick if they decide to draft someone with it. With JaMarcus sitting there I wouldn't pass him up. The o-line can be fixed with a new blocking scheme, better play calling, and a few free agents here and there. I wouldn't trade my number one pick for someone else's and a linemen if that's what you're saying. I'd let Moss go for whatever I could get for him. I'd trade him for a proven offensive lineman.... but I wouldn't package a deal with Moss and the number one pick. Giving too much away.
addition by subtraction...right now that's the term the raiders offense needs to use!
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
Hm? I still wouldn't do it. We'll see what the Raiders do with Randy and their number one....

If I was Al I would trade Moss to free up some cap room and then sign a free agent lineman here and there. But I wouldn't touch my number one because I'd use it to draft the qb of the future in Russell. We have question marks at qb too. I like Brooks but he went something like 0-6 or 0-7 as a starter and he threw a pick in every game. Walter is a statue and makes bad decisions. So it would be very hard to pass up a qb like Russell, plus with all the hype surrounding us and the number one pick we'll have our fans at the stadium to sell out. New coach, new qb.

We have new offensive coaches. Now we need to draft Russell and then work on our o-line. We'll see though...
 
Apr 25, 2002
3,020
2
38
Tony said:
Yeah I read the trade. Makes sense for a Broncos fan... And what do you mean by established o-line? You mean a lineman? I still wouldn't do that. The Raiders will find a way to sign the number one pick if they decide to draft someone with it. With JaMarcus sitting there I wouldn't pass him up. The o-line can be fixed with a new blocking scheme, better play calling, and a few free agents here and there. I wouldn't trade my number one pick for someone else's and a linemen if that's what you're saying. I'd let Moss go for whatever I could get for him. I'd trade him for a proven offensive lineman.... but I wouldn't package a deal with Moss and the number one pick. Giving too much away.
I disagree about a new scheme fixing things. This o-line has been through every scheme possible now with all the different coaches and they have played like trash regardless. Walker is gone(thank god), Grove should be gone, Sims is old and Gallery is on thin ice. We need new players. I like scary1's idea even tho I dont know if any team would do a trade like that for Moss.
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
We'll just have to see... Art was too old school. He believed linemen should block for too long. In todays game the QB's are asked to get rid of the ball in like 3 seconds because you have skilled pash rushers. Art didn't believe in that. Those 7 step drops/30 and 40 yard routes made the linemen look bad. I am not saying that they're all that, but with better play calling the linemen won't give up as many sacks as they did last year. We'll see though.

In my opinion it would be stupid to give up our number one pick for some linemen. Let's see what happens.
 
Apr 25, 2002
3,020
2
38
Tony said:
In my opinion it would be stupid to give up our number one pick for some linemen. Let's see what happens.
It wouldn't be dumb if we also got a high-mid first rounder. The o-line would be fixed somewhat and we could still fill a need and draft a RB, QB, DT etc in the first. The 1st overall pick is just way too risky IMO..especially in this years draft. Im prayin we trade out of the #1 spot.
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
3VID3NC3 said:
It wouldn't be dumb if we also got a high-mid first rounder. The o-line would be fixed somewhat and we could still fill a need and draft a RB, QB, DT etc in the first. The 1st overall pick is just way too risky IMO..especially in this years draft. Im prayin we trade out of the #1 spot.

A voice of reason from the raider fans....listen to this man!
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
We'll just have to see... Art was too old school. He believed linemen should block for too long. In todays game the QB's are asked to get rid of the ball in like 3 seconds because you have skilled pash rushers. Art didn't believe in that. Those 7 step drops/30 and 40 yard routes made the linemen look bad. I am not saying that they're all that, but with better play calling the linemen won't give up as many sacks as they did last year. We'll see though.

In my opinion it would be stupid to give up our number one pick for some linemen. Let's see what happens.
This right here makes me see you are not reading the trade right at all. You are getting rid of Moss (who doesn't want to be there anyway) and the #1 (higher cap pick), for an O-lineman (which you need), and another high pick (with less cap value but still a good player).

Moss could be gone for nothing quite possibly soon...so really you are getting a #1 and a line-man for just your #1
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
thascary1 said:
This right here makes me see you are not reading the trade right at all. You are getting rid of Moss (who doesn't want to be there anyway) and the #1 (higher cap pick), for an O-lineman (which you need), and another high pick (with less cap value but still a good player).

Moss could be gone for nothing quite possibly soon...so really you are getting a #1 and a line-man for just your #1
I am reading your trade right... So one lineman is going to fix things in your opinion? We could draft linemen in the later rounds. I think some free agents and a change of blocking schemes and play calling might help too. I understand that we lead the league in sacks given up but we don't have to give up our number one draft pick to address that problem. Giving up the number one "overall" pick in the draft would be hard to do. Look at the 49ers for example. They signed Larry Allen in the off season and the next thing you know Frank Gore is busting through holes.

Now if you want to talk trades.... I would send Moss and our second round pick to Detroit for their second pick in this year's draft. Then we could draft JaMarucs Russell and Adrian Peterson. I know Detroit wouldn't do it though... Moss probably would like to play in a dome again. Roy Williams and Randy Moss on the same team? Just wishful thinking.... I know that ain't gone happen.

I hope the Raiders don't trade that pick though. I know there's a risk involved but we gotta roll the dice and see what happens. We have a new head coach, offensive coordinator, now let's get a new Qb. Russell got some serious skills. Can't pass him up! thascary 1 I know you're worried because you'd rather have your Broncos face Brooks or Walter and not Russell. All that man coverage that the Broncos play will get exploited.
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
I am reading your trade right... So one lineman is going to fix things in your opinion? We could draft linemen in the later rounds. I think some free agents and a change of blocking schemes and play calling might help too. I understand that we lead the league in sacks given up but we don't have to give up our number one draft pick to address that problem. Giving up the number one "overall" pick in the draft would be hard to do. Look at the 49ers for example. They signed Larry Allen in the off season and the next thing you know Frank Gore is busting through holes.

Now if you want to talk trades.... I would send Moss and our second round pick to Detroit for their second pick in this year's draft. Then we could draft JaMarucs Russell and Adrian Peterson. I know Detroit wouldn't do it though... Moss probably would like to play in a dome again. Roy Williams and Randy Moss on the same team? Just wishful thinking.... I know that ain't gone happen.

I hope the Raiders don't trade that pick though. I know there's a risk involved but we gotta roll the dice and see what happens. We have a new head coach, offensive coordinator, now let's get a new Qb. Russell got some serious skills. Can't pass him up! thascary 1 I know you're worried because you'd rather have your Broncos face Brooks or Walter and not Russell. All that man coverage that the Broncos play will get exploited.

a rookie lineman will NOT solve your problems, an established 1 is a START...NOT THE ANSWER...A START!!!!!

You couldn't even afford to sign both Jamarcus and AP so that's not even an option, even if Detroit did it!

bwhahahaha I am not scared of ANY rookie QB. Again you still have yet to prove to me where a rookie qb has did shit and made the playoffs outside of Rothlisberger ( which was more off thier defense and scheme because what did he do last year?), and Marino (also how many bowls???, play off wins?)

So even your 2 poster boys for rookie qb's and playoffs don't have very good track record with playoffs and super bowls as a whole.

Also LAMONT JORDAN IS NO FRANK GORE!

It seriously is useless talking to you anymore. You think I have an agenda to what I say like it will be what the Raiders do and it will help Denver....I am trying to give serious talks to how to help your squad and you don't want to hear so be it!
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
have fun with your rookie qb you want getting killed and no playoffs yet again.

Call Lienert, Carr, Harrington, and ask them how well it is being a rookie behind no o-line and how the expience helped them.

Cutler and Young at least sat a few games learned a little bit and fared WAY better! Yet niether one of them made playoffs either, and Cutler just about single handidly could be to blame why Denver DID NOT make playoffs.
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
You're basing your opinions on situations that didn't work out for other teams. Just becasue they didn't work for other teams doesn't mean they won't work for the Raiders. You can't put the blame on Cutler for the Broncos not making the playoffs. Y'all choked. Cutler doesn't play defense. And Cutler didn't play all that bad either.

So what you're saying is if we draft a rookie qb and start him we are automatically disqualified from the playoffs?
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
You're basing your opinions on situations that didn't work out for other teams. Just becasue they didn't work for other teams doesn't mean they won't work for the Raiders. You can't put the blame on Cutler for the Broncos not making the playoffs. Y'all choked. Cutler doesn't play defense. And Cutler didn't play all that bad either.

So what you're saying is if we draft a rookie qb and start him we are automatically disqualified from the playoffs?
So situations that haven't worked for just about 31 other teams over the course of the whole NFL HISTORY will work for the Raiders? I mean you all have a better o-line than all the qb's I mentioned right???? WRONG?

Broncos choked because Cutler didn't keep defesne off the field, and Cutler threw more int's returned for td's in less games than plummer, not too mention he was the reason we lost to the 49ers.


Also I find it funny more of the Raiders fans agree with I am saying they should do than you.
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
thascary1 said:
So situations that haven't worked for just about 31 other teams over the course of the whole NFL HISTORY will work for the Raiders? I mean you all have a better o-line than all the qb's I mentioned right???? WRONG?

Broncos choked because Cutler didn't keep defesne off the field, and Cutler threw more int's returned for td's in less games than plummer, not too mention he was the reason we lost to the 49ers.


Also I find it funny more of the Raiders fans agree with I am saying they should do than you.
I don't think you're understanding the point about the o-line. The protection schemes maybe changed. They may go to a more zone blocking scheme than man blocking scheme. They might do more cut blocking like the Broncos do. Gallery maybe moved again to a position to where he's more comfortable. Grove maybe replaced with Sims... who knows? Why do you think Gregg Knapp was brought in?

No the Broncos choked because their defense didn't keep the 49ers out of the end zone when it counted. You can't blame your rookie QB for the Broncos choking. The 49ers just served y'all. It ain't Cutler's fault. He threw 1 pick that game. Your boy Plummer stepped in and got picked off too. So why aren't you blaming him? Tatum Bell fumbled why aren't you blaming him? Why aren't you blaming the defense who gave up over 150 yards to Frank Gore? You're putting all the blame on your Qb just because he's a rookie.

And yes some Raider fans are agreeing with you and some are agreeing with me.
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
I don't think you're understanding the point about the o-line. The protection schemes maybe changed. They may go to a more zone blocking scheme than man blocking scheme. They might do more cut blocking like the Broncos do. Gallery maybe moved again to a position to where he's more comfortable. Grove maybe replaced with Sims... who knows? Why do you think Gregg Knapp was brought in?

No the Broncos choked because their defense didn't keep the 49ers out of the end zone when it counted. You can't blame your rookie QB for the Broncos choking. The 49ers just served y'all. It ain't Cutler's fault. He threw 1 pick that game. Your boy Plummer stepped in and got picked off too. So why aren't you blaming him? Tatum Bell fumbled why aren't you blaming him? Why aren't you blaming the defense who gave up over 150 yards to Frank Gore? You're putting all the blame on your Qb just because he's a rookie.

And yes some Raider fans are agreeing with you and some are agreeing with me.
well hmmm I was at the game and watched Cutler moves us 0 times. His pick went for a td, plummers didn't, bells fumble didn't. And Gore ran on everyne so aint no thing.

With every post you do show me more and more you really don't watch too many games.
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
Well Cutler went 21/30 with 1 TD and 1 Int returned for a Td. Cutler lead your team on an 80 yard drive in 10 plays to throw a TD the Scheffler (who by the way is another rookie) with 90 seconds left in regulation? Or was that your boy Plummer? You were at the game and gone say Cutler moved your team 0 times? Where were you at when he was leading y'all on the last scoring drive in regulation with a minute and a half left? Were you getting some nachos?

You keep saying how rookie Qb don't do much... but Cutler took Plummer's job and put up better numbers than Plummer.
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
48
thascary1 said:
Again you still have yet to prove to me where a rookie qb has did shit and made the playoffs outside of Rothlisberger ( which was more off thier defense and scheme because what did he do last year?), and Marino (also how many bowls???, play off wins?)
Eli Manning made the playoffs in his first year, I think... If not he made it his second year.
 
Mar 16, 2005
6,904
403
83
Tony said:
Well Cutler went 21/30 with 1 TD and 1 Int returned for a Td. Cutler lead your team on an 80 yard drive in 10 plays to throw a TD the Scheffler (who by the way is another rookie) with 90 seconds left in regulation? Or was that your boy Plummer? You were at the game and gone say Cutler moved your team 0 times? Where were you at when he was leading y'all on the last scoring drive in regulation with a minute and a half left? Were you getting some nachos?

still see no mention of the int for a pick six......how many did we lose by again?

He throw to an open niner defender when not 1 broncos was near it.