Las Vegas Raiders Thread

Kev8360

golfball37 wrote: »

Mack traded to Chicago

Not surprised this was coming once Carr got his deal - just dont have the cash to make the deal happen.

We better make use of the draft picks now.

golfball37

Kev8360 wrote: »

Not surprised this was coming once Carr got his deal - just dont have the cash to make the deal happen.

We better make use of the draft picks now.

We’ve picked up aj McCarron from Buffalo. Wtf

Kev8360

I am genuinely baffled by the QBs that we have brought in this year - Hackenburg and McCarron have not shown in any way that they are NFL QBs.

This is going to be a long year...

heyjude

Reggie McKenzie said that he was committed to making Mack a 'Raider for Life', Gruden said he was committed to bringing a championship to Oakland. Yet it seems that the Raiders made an offer in February and there were no further contact between the sides until the end, so I don't know how that qualifies as a negotiation.

Gruden now runs the team(on the strength of his ten year $100 contract), so when it emerged that he had only spoken to Mack make briefly in Jan/Feb, when he made the comment about the defence not being good even with Mack(what more could he do than be all pro in 2 positions? Could KNJ and a lack of suporting talent, not be the real reason ?) and when they then drafted Arden Kee, ostensibly to be a backup to Mack, then effectively the die was cast. But if that was what they had decided, then why not arrange the trade before the 2018 draft, when they could have brought in extra talent for this year ? They should also have avoided trading a third round pick to Pittsburgh for Martavius Bryant, for what at best was going to be just for one year and now turns out not to be a single regular season game and used that pick, if they valued it so little, to pick a young quarterback to challenge Cook and Manuel, which would have saved the 5th round pick that they just spent trading for AJ McCarron.

The Mack trade itself offered lousy value to the Raiders, the Bears will likely improve this year and next, so the 2019 1st rounder could be in the 20s and the 2nd rounder that the Raiders are giving, likely means that the so called 2nd 1st rounder will just see the Raiders moving up a few places(from high second to low first). It says everything when Bears fans are excited by the trade and very satisfied with the what they are giving up, for a probable future Hall of Fame player in his prime.

Mack was along with Tim Brown and Charles Woodson, one of the three best players drafted by the Raiders in the last thirty years, so one wonders what the conversation will be like if one of their defensive draftees from this year outperforms his contract, surely there's no way they would accept being told that when their contract is up, the Raiders will look after them. The message is loud and clear, play out your low value rookie contract and go elsewhere to get paid. It will also hurt the teams' ability to attract free agents, as playing alongside Mack was a draw for free agents.

It will be interesting to see what happens next year, when wide receiver Amari Cooper(who has the same agent as Mack) finds himself in the same position as Mack, facing a 5th year option and seeking a new big money contract. Will Gruden fail to speak to him between February and September, will he remind people that the Raiders weren't that good last year even with Cooper and will he sanction a trade ? I suspect the answer is he will speak to him, there will be meaningful negotiations and he won't blame Cooper for recent poor seasons, as it is clear that Gruden values offensive players much more highly than defensive ones.

I suspect the reason why the plan to trade Mack was kept under wraps for so long, has to do with season ticket sales and Gruden's commitment to bring a championship to Oakland. If they had traded Mack in March for draft picks in 2019 and 2020(when the team will be in Vegas), then season ticket sales could have plunged costing them millions in lost revenue, at this stage though, the season tickets would already have been sold.

The relationship between Gruden and new defensive coordinator Paul Guenther is also sure to be strained if Guenthen was enticed to Oakland by the prospect of coaching Khalil Mack and if he wasn't told until the last minute what they were actually planning. Its ironic that the Mack trade happened the same week that Guenthers former team, the Bengals, signed two of the stars of their defensive line to big money contract extensions

They better hope that this years' draftees turn into real studs and that Guenthers' scheme can fully utilise them, otherwise the offense may need to put up big numbers to even finish the season 8-8.

I personally rate this trade as a bigger mistake than drafting Jamarcus Russell, as at least in that case, the team was in dire need of a QB and the draft experts agreed that Russell, along with Brady Quinn were the top top QB prospects that year. As it turned out neither lived up to their pre-draft billing.

Prefab Sprouter

I'm utterly gobsmacked by whats happened the last 48 hours, have we progressed any since the last days of Al Davis. The fact that Mack has been traded shows us that this season is already written off. We're in rebuild modem, and as Cleveland continuously show us, draft picks dont necessarily make a good team. Then we ship out 2 receivers , Bryant and Switzer, ditch all our backup QBs and bring in one who wasnt good enough for Buffalo. Is McCarron really an upgrade over Manuel??? Jesus its hard to look forward to the season when you see moves like that.

Itssoeasy

heyjude wrote: »

Reggie McKenzie said that he was committed to making Mack a 'Raider for Life', Gruden said he was committed to bringing a championship to Oakland. Yet it seems that the Raiders made an offer in February and there were no further contact between the sides until the end, so I don't know how that qualifies as a negotiation.

Gruden now runs the team(on the strength of his ten year $100 contract), so when it emerged that he had only spoken to Mack make briefly in Jan/Feb, when he made the comment about the defence not being good even with Mack(what more could he do than be all pro in 2 positions? Could KNJ and a lack of suporting talent, not be the real reason ?) and when they then drafted Arden Kee, ostensibly to be a backup to Mack, then effectively the die was cast. But if that was what they had decided, then why not arrange the trade before the 2018 draft, when they could have brought in extra talent for this year ? They should also have avoided trading a third round pick to Pittsburgh for Martavius Bryant, for what at best was going to be just for one year and now turns out not to be a single regular season game and used that pick, if they valued it so little, to pick a young quarterback to challenge Cook and Manuel, which would have saved the 5th round pick that they just spent trading for AJ McCarron.

The Mack trade itself offered lousy value to the Raiders, the Bears will likely improve this year and next, so the 2019 1st rounder could be in the 20s and the 2nd rounder that the Raiders are giving, likely means that the so called 2nd 1st rounder will just see the Raiders moving up a few places(from high second to low first). It says everything when Bears fans are excited by the trade and very satisfied with the what they are giving up, for a probable future Hall of Fame player in his prime.

Mack was along with Tim Brown and Charles Woodson, one of the three best players drafted by the Raiders in the last thirty years, so one wonders what the conversation will be like if one of their defensive draftees from this year outperforms his contract, surely there's no way they would accept being told that when their contract is up, the Raiders will look after them. The message is loud and clear, play out your low value rookie contract and go elsewhere to get paid. It will also hurt the teams' ability to attract free agents, as playing alongside Mack was a draw for free agents.

It will be interesting to see what happens next year, when wide receiver Amari Cooper(who has the same agent as Mack) finds himself in the same position as Mack, facing a 5th year option and seeking a new big money contract. Will Gruden fail to speak to him between February and September, will he remind people that the Raiders weren't that good last year even with Cooper and will he sanction a trade ? I suspect the answer is he will speak to him, there will be meaningful negotiations and he won't blame Cooper for recent poor seasons, as it is clear that Gruden values offensive players much more highly than defensive ones.

I suspect the reason why the plan to trade Mack was kept under wraps for so long, has to do with season ticket sales and Gruden's commitment to bring a championship to Oakland. If they had traded Mack in March for draft picks in 2019 and 2020(when the team will be in Vegas), then season ticket sales could have plunged costing them millions in lost revenue, at this stage though, the season tickets would already have been sold.

The relationship between Gruden and new defensive coordinator Paul Guenther is also sure to be strained if Guenthen was enticed to Oakland by the prospect of coaching Khalil Mack and if he wasn't told until the last minute what they were actually planning. Its ironic that the Mack trade happened the same week that Guenthers former team, the Bengals, signed two of the stars of their defensive line to big money contract extensions

They better hope that this years' draftees turn into real studs and that Guenthers' scheme can fully utilise them, otherwise the offense may need to put up big numbers to even finish the season 8-8.

I personally rate this trade as a bigger mistake than drafting Jamarcus Russell, as at least in that case, the team was in dire need of a QB and the draft experts agreed that Russell, along with Brady Quinn were the top top QB prospects that year. As it turned out neither lived up to their pre-draft billing.

The first sentence of your brilliant post should send shivers down raider fans spine. The GM and HC is an extremely important relationship and that first sentence shows that they have different commitments and because of it the raiders lost an amazing player.

I mean either reggie mckenzie is the GM or he isn't. It's seem that gruden won out. If gruden wants that control then mark Davis needs to fire mckenzie because at least to me it looks like the gm is like a spare at a wedding now.

I'm hopeful that the raiders can get back to where they belong and I say that as a fan of history. The raiders are a legendary AFC franchise and the league needs the marquee franchises to be if not winning Super Bowls every year they need them to be competitive.

eire4

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

I'm utterly gobsmacked by whats happened the last 48 hours, have we progressed any since the last days of Al Davis. The fact that Mack has been traded shows us that this season is already written off. We're in rebuild modem, and as Cleveland continuously show us, draft picks dont necessarily make a good team. Then we ship out 2 receivers , Bryant and Switzer, ditch all our backup QBs and bring in one who wasnt good enough for Buffalo. Is McCarron really an upgrade over Manuel??? Jesus its hard to look forward to the season when you see moves like that.

I wish I could disagree with you. But I would say sadly your on the mark there. One thing is clear already this is very much Gruden's show and how it turns out is pretty much all on him. For me this trade is a joke. The Bears will probably do fairly well now so those 2 first round picks will likely be nowhere near top 10 picks which for me is what it would have taken to make this trade a positive.

heyjude

On NFL Network they revealed that 12 teams made enquiries about trading for Mack, but that was reduced to 6 when they realised they would need to sign him to a new contract. However, the argument by Gruden and the Raiders to justify trading Mack, that no team has a QB and also a defensive player on such big money contracts, was refuted when you hear that among the 6 teams that were prepared to acquire Mack and give him a big money deal were Green Bay and San Francisco, both of whom have QBs earning even more than Carr. The Bears won because they offered more to the Raiders, but both GB and SF were prepared to give Mack a new contract. I think the fact that if the Raiders had given a new contract, they would have immediately needed to put the guaranteed money in escrow, may have been a bigger problem that the overall size of the deal, because possibly Mark Davis doesn't currently have $70+m in cash to put aside for Mack, due to expenses associated with the move to Vegas.

heyjude

Looks like Raider fans will be supporting two teams for the next two seasons, the Raiders and whoever is playing the Bears that week. The worse the Bears do, the more valuable the extra draft picks will be.

eire4

heyjude wrote: »

Looks like Raider fans will be supporting two teams for the next two seasons, the Raiders and whoever is playing the Bears that week. The worse the Bears do, the more valuable the extra draft picks will be.

Funny I was thinking the exact same thing myself. Not really paid much attention to where the Bears are at till now and clearly Mack makes them a better team defensively but hopefully they continue to struggle as they have done in recent seasons. The young QB they have has shown promise but is still not a proven success so a lot will depend on how he does this season really.

heyjude

Not wishing to suggest a conspiracy or anything(!), but it was reported that, of the 27 players on the Raider roster at the start of the year that had been drafted by Reggie McKenzie, just 10 now remain(so 17 have been cut or traded since the end of last season). With last years' 7th round pick defensive tackle Treyvon Hester, who played in 14 games last season, with 1 start, 19 tackles and a forced fumble, being cut yesterday and replaced by Brian Price, a DT cut by the Cowboys, but who media reports suggest the Cowboys were hoping to re-sign.

Derek Carr, DeAndre Washington,Gabe Jackson,Amari Cooper, Jon Feliciano, Justin Ellis, Shilique Calhoun, Marquel Lee, Gareon Conley and Karl Joseph are now the only players remaining on the 53 man roster that were drafted by the Raiders prior to this year. You'd have to wonder whether, if injuries hit mid-season Washington and Calhoun could be vulnerable too. Its hard to imagine that Reggie McKenzie would have wanted to/planned to cut this many, as he would have hoped that a change of coaching might turn some of them around, so Gruden really seems to be rubbing his face in it.

heyjude

They were hopefully keeping the best till last , but it made the weekend a bit of an anti-climax for Raider fans, still at least the Bears lost(though Mack did his best in limited action).

Tonights' game is a pretty daunting one for Oakland and may not tell us much, as the Rams are built to win now, whereas with all the rookies on defence and with the extra first rounders in 2019 and 2020, the Raiders are probably a year or two away from a real super bowl challenge.

I'm looking forward tonight to seeing how Osemele(if he plays), Hudson and Jackson handle Donald and Suh, whether Gruden opens up the full playbook(or plays a bit conservative with the Broncos coming up next), how Lynch plays and whether he shows the form he had at the end of last season, how the third wide receiver plays(or whether Gruden uses a tight end or Jalen Richard instead), whether Kolton Miller can handle his duties at LT and Donald Penn at RT or whether they need help, how much PJ Hall, Maurice Hurst and Arden Key play and how much pressure Hall and Hurst can generate up the middle and finally after trading Khalil Mack, I'll be interested to see the reception Gruden gets from the home crowd(even allowing for it being the home opener)

eire4

Well in the end that went as I expected to and ended up in a heavy loss to a very good Los Angeles Rams team as the above post says built to win this year.
Credit to the Raiders for a great first half they kept the Rams offense off the field but for all the possession and territory Carr didn't get the points on the board and the interception late in the half when in the red zone was for me the turning point in the game. Instead of going up 17-7 and having momentum the Raiders end up just scraping in up by 3 at half despite basically dominating the first half. I was thinking at half the Raiders had not made their dominance count on the score board and the Rams would make them pay in the second half and boy sadly was I right although Carr's dreadful night was the reason things ended up so ugly on the score board as in fairness as bad as the Raiders defense has been for years now they were not as bad as the score board suggested last night. The Rams scored 17 of their 33 points off of the 3 interceptions of Carr. Another long season of losing beckons I think. At best I think the Raiders will be 6-10.

Prefab Sprouter

eire4 wrote: »

Well in the end that went as I expected to and ended up in a heavy loss to a very good Los Angeles Rams team as the above post says built to win this year.
Credit to the Raiders for a great first half they kept the Rams offense off the field but for all the possession and territory Carr didn't get the points on the board and the interception late in the half when in the red zone was for me the turning point in the game. Instead of going up 17-7 and having momentum the Raiders end up just scraping in up by 3 at half despite basically dominating the first half. I was thinking at half the Raiders had not made their dominance count on the score board and the Rams would make them pay in the second half and boy sadly was I right although Carr's dreadful night was the reason things ended up so ugly on the score board as in fairness as bad as the Raiders defense has been for years now they were not as bad as the score board suggested last night. The Rams scored 17 of their 33 points off of the 3 interceptions of Carr. Another long season of losing beckons I think. At best I think the Raiders will be 6-10.

I also reckoned that we would lose last night's match, so I'm not that upset about the actual result. And of course reading all the Raiders forums today, everyone is calling for Carr's head on a platter. That and, we would have won if Mack was playing, both statements I disagree with. Maybe Carr is a busted flush, but the Rams defense is a good unit. It concerns me that Cooper and Nelson were non-factors last night. I am hoping that there will be a better showing against Denver next week......... i'd like to think that Carr will put up a better showing next week. He is the best QB prospect Oakland has had in years and we should show more faith in him. The Defense did a decent job in the first half. In the second it was the same ol story of the Offense failing and the Defense being worn down.....I'll keep my pitchfork and torch in the barn and see how next week pans out.

Prefab Sprouter

And now we're resigning Bryant........what in Gods name is going on? If he wasnt good enough a week ago, how has he suddenly improved???

Jolly Red Giant

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

I also reckoned that we would lose last night's match, so I'm not that upset about the actual result. And of course reading all the Raiders forums today, everyone is calling for Carr's head on a platter. That and, we would have won if Mack was playing, both statements I disagree with. Maybe Carr is a busted flush, but the Rams defense is a good unit. It concerns me that Cooper and Nelson were non-factors last night. I am hoping that there will be a better showing against Denver next week......... i'd like to think that Carr will put up a better showing next week. He is the best QB prospect Oakland has had in years and we should show more faith in him. The Defense did a decent job in the first half. In the second it was the same ol story of the Offense failing and the Defense being worn down.....I'll keep my pitchfork and torch in the barn and see how next week pans out.

The problem for Carr and the Raiders is that they are facing a Denver D that is almost as good as the Rams (Rams secondary is probably a bit better) - the Broncos sacked Wilson six times last week and drove him into the dirt on several other occasions.

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

And now we're resigning Bryant........what in Gods name is going on? If he wasnt good enough a week ago, how has he suddenly improved???

Bryant can be a match-up nightmare for defenders - if his head is in the game (which it usually isn't) - and Gruden is panicking already.

eire4

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

I also reckoned that we would lose last night's match, so I'm not that upset about the actual result. And of course reading all the Raiders forums today, everyone is calling for Carr's head on a platter. That and, we would have won if Mack was playing, both statements I disagree with. Maybe Carr is a busted flush, but the Rams defense is a good unit. It concerns me that Cooper and Nelson were non-factors last night. I am hoping that there will be a better showing against Denver next week......... i'd like to think that Carr will put up a better showing next week. He is the best QB prospect Oakland has had in years and we should show more faith in him. The Defense did a decent job in the first half. In the second it was the same ol story of the Offense failing and the Defense being worn down.....I'll keep my pitchfork and torch in the barn and see how next week pans out.

I agree with you about Carr. It is way over the top to be calling for his head right now. The extent of the loss was for sure due to the nightmare he had with the 3 interceptions but he is a good QB who just had a bad game. Over the course of the season i am sure he will be fine. The Raiders have way bigger issues all over the field then Derek Carr. Not saying he is an elite NFL QB because he has not shown that yet but at worst he is a decent one.

MrKingsley

Whilst Carr was very poor I agree with the above. The raiders have so many bigger problems than Derek Carr at the minute. Head coach being one. The fact he will actually cite the lack of a pass rush after the game is laughable

Kev8360

Much improved performance this week all around, great chance to see out the game if we could have picked up a first down before the 2 minute warning.

Definitely some positives out of the game, Cooper got involved early and Carr had a gameplay that suited his quick release. I thought the offensive line played well and gave good protection but where was Jordy Nelson down the stretch? I really hoped to see him more involved and pick up catches in the clutch.

Defense really played well first half but Denvers hurry up offense in the second half just wore them down.

Prefab Sprouter

Kev8360 wrote: »

Much improved performance this week all around, great chance to see out the game if we could have picked up a first down before the 2 minute warning.

Definitely some positives out of the game, Cooper got involved early and Carr had a gameplay that suited his quick release. I thought the offensive line played well and gave good protection but where was Jordy Nelson down the stretch? I really hoped to see him more involved and pick up catches in the clutch.

Defense really played well first half but Denvers hurry up offense in the second half just wore them down.

Well said Kev. I'm gutted but it was definitely a very positive performance. Carr was efficient, and the offense worked well for most of the match.

golfball37

Much better but you could see our defense were completely out on their feet towards the end of q4

heyjude

The D line were certainly gassed in the 4th quarter, but that was partially of the Raiders own making. They only arrived in Denver on Saturday, and so made no effort to acclimatise to the altitude, their playcalling in the second half was far too conservative(too many inside runs on first down that everyone knew were coming, yet no play action) thereby forcing punts so putting the D on the field too much and too many missed tackles when defenders were in position to make a play.

They weren't helped by having to play at altitude just a couple of days after signing two free agent DTs off the street, as they will need a week or two to get up to full game speed. Maybe it would have been different if Ellis and PJ Hall were fit and able to play.

Overall though, with Mack gone and the huge roster turnover I don't think too many Raiders fans would be surprised to find us at 0-2 after 2 weeks, there are easier opponents than the Rams and easier places to go than Denver, so there are more winnable games ahead.

The half time adjustments have to be better though, they were in both games at half time and both times they were outcoached in the second half.

It was reportedly 110 degrees F at pitchside in Denver yesterday and weatherwise it doesn't get any easier with a trip cross country to Miami next week(where the Dolphins will probably force them to play in their black shirts).

Jolly Red Giant

heyjude wrote: »

They weren't helped by having to play at altitude just a couple of days after signing two free agent DTs off the street, as they will need a week or two to get up to full game speed. Maybe it would have been different if Ellis and PJ Hall were fit and able to play.

Clinton McDonald was well acclimatised and 'up to game speed' - he was with Denver up to a couple of weeks ago and was part of the DL rotation during pre-season (he was cut because Shelby Harris - former Raider - has stepped up big-time)

heyjude wrote: »

Overall though, with Mack gone and the huge roster turnover I don't think too many Raiders fans would be surprised to find us at 0-2 after 2 weeks, there are easier opponents than the Rams and easier places to go than Denver, so there are more winnable games ahead.

Denver have spluttered to two close wins - and will be hammered in the next couple of weeks if they do not up their game. Joseph is once again showing he doesn't know how to be a HC.

heyjude wrote: »

The half time adjustments have to be better though, they were in both games at half time and both times they were outcoached in the second half.

Gruden out planned and out coached the Broncos in the first half and then got too conservative in the second half trying to protect the lead - only to make the daft decision to go for it on 4th down. Denver used more shotgun which gave Keenum more time but he was like a deer in headlights despite the OL giving him plenty of protection.

The game was there for the taking by the Raiders and they let the Broncos back in with a shot to win.

SexBobomb

Woof,, that was a tough watch. So much for the offence being run through Cooper, no sign of him last night. Nelson put in a great shift but that was about it. I get that Gruden is just in the door and he's going to change the team to his liking over the next few seasons but Im not looking forward to the Browns game now.

eire4

SexBobomb wrote: »

Woof,, that was a tough watch. So much for the offence being run through Cooper, no sign of him last night. Nelson put in a great shift but that was about it. I get that Gruden is just in the door and he's going to change the team to his liking over the next few seasons but Im not looking forward to the Browns game now.

I hear you a loss to the Browns next week which incredibly is a distinct possibility and the chase for the number 1 pick in next years draft is firmly on.

Kev8360

that was somehow a harder loss to take than last week - the defense bottled up the dolphins well for most of the game - the offense just not able to get the scores when in great position.

we were in the driving seat again late and even when they went ahead i thought we would come back. that interception by Carr was so unnecessary - plenty of time left and the running game gouging the dolphins.

the Browns defensive front will give us huge problems next week - can't see Nelson or Cooper getting much - it's a worry that they can't both get going in the same game.

Prefab Sprouter

Finally!!!

eire4

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

Finally!!!

A win is a win but realistically the Browns blew that one and it must be admitted a few calls went the Raiders as well. For me nothing to be overly optimistic from that win.

Itssoeasy

eire4 wrote: »

A win is a win but realistically the Browns blew that one and it must be admitted a few calls went the Raiders as well. For me nothing to be overly optimistic from that win.

As a wise man once said they're are no pictures in the standings.

Prefab Sprouter

eire4 wrote: »

A win is a win but realistically the Browns blew that one and it must be admitted a few calls went the Raiders as well. For me nothing to be overly optimistic from that win.

Absolutely Eire, my comment was one of relief as opposed to optiimism. Sometimes you ride your luck and we did on Sunday........but a win is a win....and the standings dont worry about whether it was deserved or not. San Di....sorry Los Angeles will be a sterner test. Without a pass rush, Rivers can potentially destroy us.