Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Heres the keys to the Oakland Raiders, begin.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5364
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCOUGHMAN wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Raidin wrote:
Not sure why people think this system doesn't suit Palmer. It suits him far more then getting him to fling the ball down field so he can turn it over.


+1 on that.
If the current play of the team indicates anything, it's that it suits Palmer more than any other player we have. He's the only one thriving aside from Myers. Build around the QB, what a novel idea..


"thriving"? Laughing Brick wall


What's up bro, are you just stalking me individually here in the forum, trolling one person because they support the current team and disagree with your shortsighted perspective?

Who's playing best on our offense right now? No point in even saying our best player is on D, because it's currently the worst performing defense in the league. Hence, noone on that side of the ball is good. Can't be our Special Teams, because it's been awful.

So let me rephrase to keep you from trolling my posts and nitpicking every word I write. If one player on our team can be considered thriving, who would it be? Aside from Myers, who I already mentioned.

I mean, what kind of a troll shows up in a post nitpicking one word because of the word choice. Choose a better word then, and at least attempt to engage in intelligent discussion rather than trolling my posts, ya troll.


How about no one's thriving? You realize that just because Carson Palmer looks good throwing the ball, doesn't mean he's being successful. Thriving and playing well are two completely different things. If Carson Palmer was thriving, we'd be scoring more points, converting better on 3rd down, and seeing the redzone far more often. None of those things are his fault, but the fault of his scheme, which is why it's ludicrous to say any part of the offense is thriving.

I get that you like sticking up for Greg Knapp at any chance you can, but I find it funny that you're trying to make it seem like Knapp's offense is built around the QB just because we can't run the ball. You'll deny that, but that's really the logic you're using.


Fine. Noone is thriving. But Palmer is playing as well as anyone we have, and that was the meaning of my point.

I am not and have not stuck up for Greg Knapp. Please read my posts. My point on Knapp is that I feel this team has much bigger problems. My point in general. But as I assume you will do, feel free to go back through my posts, pull out one sentence out of context and meaning and try to expose it word by word to prove your own point, which is what exactly?

My OPINION, is that Knapp is not our biggest problem. I don't even believe he is in the top five of our team's problems. My Opinion. Firing him is a non issue to me, because the team will still be suffering greatly from other significant issues.


Knapp would definitely make my top 5. What are five issues you think are more troubling than him? Just asking for discussion purposes.


In no particular order, my top 5 are:

-CBs (More the injuries to our CBs)
-Lack of depth (DB, RB especially)
-LBs not named Wheeler
-Lack of pass rush
-Run blocking

I dont like the playcalling, but if our guys could run block effectively I honestly think the playcalling wouldnt be as much of a factor since McFadden would be rolling. Then again, the run blocking issues are mainly on the ZBS right now, which was Knapp's doing so I dont know if that puts him in my top 5 or not- I guess indirectly it does?


lol also 3 and outs put more pressure on those db's and lb's. if knapp could just sustain some drives it would help the d alot. we are outscored 55-7 in the 3rd qtr, are 14 -51 on third downs and have only scored 6 tds total in 4 games. imo thats on knapp.


Yea, the more I think about it the more some of those things can be grouped into one thing affected by Knapp.
_________________


Silver&Black88 on the sig

La_Vader wrote:
I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5813
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Raidin wrote:
Not sure why people think this system doesn't suit Palmer. It suits him far more then getting him to fling the ball down field so he can turn it over.


+1 on that.
If the current play of the team indicates anything, it's that it suits Palmer more than any other player we have. He's the only one thriving aside from Myers. Build around the QB, what a novel idea..


"thriving"? Laughing Brick wall


What's up bro, are you just stalking me individually here in the forum, trolling one person because they support the current team and disagree with your shortsighted perspective?

Who's playing best on our offense right now? No point in even saying our best player is on D, because it's currently the worst performing defense in the league. Hence, noone on that side of the ball is good. Can't be our Special Teams, because it's been awful.

So let me rephrase to keep you from trolling my posts and nitpicking every word I write. If one player on our team can be considered thriving, who would it be? Aside from Myers, who I already mentioned.

I mean, what kind of a troll shows up in a post nitpicking one word because of the word choice. Choose a better word then, and at least attempt to engage in intelligent discussion rather than trolling my posts, ya troll.


How about no one's thriving? You realize that just because Carson Palmer looks good throwing the ball, doesn't mean he's being successful. Thriving and playing well are two completely different things. If Carson Palmer was thriving, we'd be scoring more points, converting better on 3rd down, and seeing the redzone far more often. None of those things are his fault, but the fault of his scheme, which is why it's ludicrous to say any part of the offense is thriving.

I get that you like sticking up for Greg Knapp at any chance you can, but I find it funny that you're trying to make it seem like Knapp's offense is built around the QB just because we can't run the ball. You'll deny that, but that's really the logic you're using.


Fine. Noone is thriving. But Palmer is playing as well as anyone we have, and that was the meaning of my point.

I am not and have not stuck up for Greg Knapp. Please read my posts. My point on Knapp is that I feel this team has much bigger problems. My point in general. But as I assume you will do, feel free to go back through my posts, pull out one sentence out of context and meaning and try to expose it word by word to prove your own point, which is what exactly?

My OPINION, is that Knapp is not our biggest problem. I don't even believe he is in the top five of our team's problems. My Opinion. Firing him is a non issue to me, because the team will still be suffering greatly from other significant issues.


Knapp would definitely make my top 5. What are five issues you think are more troubling than him? Just asking for discussion purposes.


In no particular order, my top 5 are:

-CBs (More the injuries to our CBs)
-Lack of depth (DB, RB especially)
-LBs not named Wheeler
-Lack of pass rush
-Run blocking

I dont like the playcalling, but if our guys could run block effectively I honestly think the playcalling wouldnt be as much of a factor since McFadden would be rolling. Then again, the run blocking issues are mainly on the ZBS right now, which was Knapp's doing so I dont know if that puts him in my top 5 or not- I guess indirectly it does?


Respectfully, but vehemently disagree. The overwhelming consensus around here for a winning formula was : Same PBS vertical offense + run defense - league leading penalties = competitive. That's ALL DA had to do. The only assumption in this equation is that Saunders would be able to run HueJax's offense. Knapp's offense IS the problem because the lack of offense is the major contributor to exposing the defense. If the Raiders EVER had a lead they might be able to pin their ears back and blitzkrieg the opposition. A layman could have solved this equation. DA tried to reinvent the wheel. FAIL.
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raidin


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 5337
Location: Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:

Respectfully, but vehemently disagree. The overwhelming consensus around here for a winning formula was : Same PBS vertical offense + run defense - league leading penalties = competitive. That's ALL DA had to do. The only assumption in this equation is that Saunders would be able to run HueJax's offense. Knapp's offense IS the problem because the lack of offense is the major contributor to exposing the defense. If the Raiders EVER had a lead they might be able to pin their ears back and blitzkrieg the opposition. A layman could have solved this equation. DA tried to reinvent the wheel. FAIL.



The overwhelming number of posters on here are pretty stupid though. There's so many "flaws" in that formula that it's hard to know where to start.
_________________
raidr4life wrote:
Imagine if EricAllen21 posted better. Just imagine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22505
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Raidin wrote:
Not sure why people think this system doesn't suit Palmer. It suits him far more then getting him to fling the ball down field so he can turn it over.


+1 on that.
If the current play of the team indicates anything, it's that it suits Palmer more than any other player we have. He's the only one thriving aside from Myers. Build around the QB, what a novel idea..


"thriving"? Laughing Brick wall


What's up bro, are you just stalking me individually here in the forum, trolling one person because they support the current team and disagree with your shortsighted perspective?

Who's playing best on our offense right now? No point in even saying our best player is on D, because it's currently the worst performing defense in the league. Hence, noone on that side of the ball is good. Can't be our Special Teams, because it's been awful.

So let me rephrase to keep you from trolling my posts and nitpicking every word I write. If one player on our team can be considered thriving, who would it be? Aside from Myers, who I already mentioned.

I mean, what kind of a troll shows up in a post nitpicking one word because of the word choice. Choose a better word then, and at least attempt to engage in intelligent discussion rather than trolling my posts, ya troll.


How about no one's thriving? You realize that just because Carson Palmer looks good throwing the ball, doesn't mean he's being successful. Thriving and playing well are two completely different things. If Carson Palmer was thriving, we'd be scoring more points, converting better on 3rd down, and seeing the redzone far more often. None of those things are his fault, but the fault of his scheme, which is why it's ludicrous to say any part of the offense is thriving.

I get that you like sticking up for Greg Knapp at any chance you can, but I find it funny that you're trying to make it seem like Knapp's offense is built around the QB just because we can't run the ball. You'll deny that, but that's really the logic you're using.


Fine. Noone is thriving. But Palmer is playing as well as anyone we have, and that was the meaning of my point.

I am not and have not stuck up for Greg Knapp. Please read my posts. My point on Knapp is that I feel this team has much bigger problems. My point in general. But as I assume you will do, feel free to go back through my posts, pull out one sentence out of context and meaning and try to expose it word by word to prove your own point, which is what exactly?

My OPINION, is that Knapp is not our biggest problem. I don't even believe he is in the top five of our team's problems. My Opinion. Firing him is a non issue to me, because the team will still be suffering greatly from other significant issues.


Knapp would definitely make my top 5. What are five issues you think are more troubling than him? Just asking for discussion purposes.


In no particular order, my top 5 are:

-CBs (More the injuries to our CBs)
-Lack of depth (DB, RB especially)
-LBs not named Wheeler
-Lack of pass rush
-Run blocking

I dont like the playcalling, but if our guys could run block effectively I honestly think the playcalling wouldnt be as much of a factor since McFadden would be rolling. Then again, the run blocking issues are mainly on the ZBS right now, which was Knapp's doing so I dont know if that puts him in my top 5 or not- I guess indirectly it does?


Respectfully, but vehemently disagree. The overwhelming consensus around here for a winning formula was : Same PBS vertical offense + run defense - league leading penalties = competitive. That's ALL DA had to do. The only assumption in this equation is that Saunders would be able to run HueJax's offense. Knapp's offense IS the problem because the lack of offense is the major contributor to exposing the defense. If the Raiders EVER had a lead they might be able to pin their ears back and blitzkrieg the opposition. A layman could have solved this equation. DA tried to reinvent the wheel. FAIL.


You however forget other details. Like schedules, other teams changes, injuries and so on.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5813
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:

Well said. Knapp will catch a lot of heat, but his success or failure is based on the teams ability to execute.

If they can't execute the blocks, they can't execute the running game and the play action passing game is dead.

Like Bresnehan a year ago. Everyone piled it on him, but the guy didn't have talent to execute his schemes. Now Tarver is strapped with the same problem, plus injuries to boot.

Have to have coachable talent to make your coaches look good.

I doubt Harbagh or any other coach for example could have came to Oakland and had success year 1. The talent has been low on defense for a decade. Asomugha, Burgess. Only two players who were truly talented at their positions on D over the last 10 season. That's pretty damn sad.


Knapp catches a lot of heat because he failed to implement a system that compliments the player's currently on the roster. period. Knapp's antiquated in-the-box rigid approach is a throwback to 2001 I could have done without. In today's NFL coaches conform to the player's they have if they want to remain employed. No one gets 3 seasons to turn over a roster in the NFL anymore (quadruple the case when limited cap space prevents gutting the roster). Verbalizing the philosophy of "this will take a few seasons" indicates to me just how out of touch he is.

Come on, Big P! You ALWAYS run to the defense of Bres. Any other portrayal of Bresnahan as anything other than Al's puppet is revisionist history. Even if Bres thought that the single high safety could work in today's modern NFL he was hamstrung by Al's motley menagerie of track stars, workouts warriors and Uncle Al's nephews.

Traver's problem is that he can't get his defense off the field and for some reason the FO decided to maintain the status quo regarding the interior of the DL which has never been adept at consistently stopping the run.

The roster isn't great but there is enough solid talent to be competitive and scrappy every Sunday. I've seen two games now where the defense couldn't wait to get on a plane. Again, before I blame our LB corps, when was the last time we saw the interior of the DL reestablish the LoS on the OTHER side of the ball?
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14229
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:

Traver's problem is that he can't get his defense off the field and for some reason the FO decided to maintain the status quo regarding the interior of the DL which has never been adept at consistently stopping the run.

The roster isn't great but there is enough solid talent to be competitive and scrappy every Sunday. I've seen two games now where the defense couldn't wait to get on a plane. Again, before I blame our LB corps, when was the last time we saw the interior of the DL reestablish the LoS on the OTHER side of the ball?


Our ability to stop runs inside the tackle box is the least of my concerns this season. When we start pressuring the QB, covering anyone, setting the edges, i'll start worrying about our inside run D.

I'm a bit disappointed with our lack of creativity on D though. Everything we do seems pretty basic. The CB situation probably has something to do with that.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5813
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:

Traver's problem is that he can't get his defense off the field and for some reason the FO decided to maintain the status quo regarding the interior of the DL which has never been adept at consistently stopping the run.

The roster isn't great but there is enough solid talent to be competitive and scrappy every Sunday. I've seen two games now where the defense couldn't wait to get on a plane. Again, before I blame our LB corps, when was the last time we saw the interior of the DL reestablish the LoS on the OTHER side of the ball?


Our ability to stop runs inside the tackle box is the least of my concerns this season. When we start pressuring the QB, covering anyone, setting the edges, i'll start worrying about our inside run D.

I'm a bit disappointed with our lack of creativity on D though. Everything we do seems pretty basic. The CB situation probably has something to do with that.


Collectively, we are putting the cart before the horse. If a defense lacks the ability to stop the run then the defense fails to have the advantage to down & distance. 2nd & short or 3rd & short are opportunities for the offense to take pot shots downfield which are quite effective against a makeshift secondary. Right now the defense has nothing to hang it's hat on. On the priority list if you aren't very good at the very least be stout in run defense.
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5766
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
holyghost wrote:

What comes into play here is that talent currently on the team was drafted with an entirely different philosophy than any other team. We drafted on size, speed, and potential. Fine. But noone was drafted to even play in a set system. We can run 6 different defenses and still not find the right one for more than 30% of our starters. They all fit on different teams. No cohesion. That necessitates a total rebuild, under an actual single system or ideal.


I really don't understand how you can say that. First, the Raiders are far from the only team using a height/weight/speed drafting philosophy. For example, the Giants and the Packers are known for doing it as well. And it shouldn't be really surprising the Packers do it since Ron Wolf has been a huge influence in their front office and we all know who he learned under.

Secondly, the Raiders have had the most set defensive scheme of any franchise in the league the last 40 years. Man to man, single high safety, little to no blitzing, 4 man rush. Accordingly, they've always been looking for fast CBs to play man on the outside, fast FS to cover so much ground in the middle of the field, pass rushing dlinemen because the rush would have to come from the front 4 and they cared less about LBs because they weren't asked to have a huge impact in that scheme.
The players targeted made perfect sense for the kind of defense we ran.

Finally, many of the current players on D (not talking only about starters there) have been brought up by the new regime.
Tollefson, Bilukidi, Crawford, Carter, Wheeler, Burris, Clayton, So'Oto, Bartell, Spencer, Lee, Adams, Ross and Francies. Presumably, they've been brought in because they fit what we want to do on D now. If the staff feels the players they inherited can't operate cohesively in this defense, they're free to let players who fit it better see more playing time, even if they're not as talented.


To the bold, the Giants and Packers do it. Within their system...
The Raiders did not do it within their system, and on top of that the system is simply outdated. Once upon a time when Al Davis was ahead of the curve finding faster, meaner, bigger players in more obscure places, it worked. Because it was actually possible to be, man for man, bigger, faster and meaner than the opponent. Not any more, not for some time.

First we will look at the new regime guys you mentioned.

Tollefson, nothing more than a spot role player. Non starter.
Bilukidi - 6th round rookie doesn't play, non starter
Crawford - 5th round rookie doesn't play, non starter
Carter - hasn't even played a down
Wheeler - our best defensive player so far this year
Burris - 4th round rookie forced into action, non starter if Curry is healthy
Clayton - non factor UDFA
So'Oto - recently signed non factor UDFA
Bartell - immediately hurt
Spencer - immediately hurt
Lee - our best CB so far
Adams - special teamer
Ross - non factor
Francies - special teamer

Two starters in the bunch, one of which who is our best defensive player right now. That alone speaks to the lack of talent on the D, considering a cheap FA pickup on a one year deal can come in and be our best defensive player. Regardless of that, it's very clear the new regime is doing everything they can with the limited resources they had to turn over the roster. Problem is without picks and money all you can really do is work with the bottom half of the roster and hope you get lucky. When any of these guys prove to be improved and better than the man in front them, they will play.

On to the past talent still here.

Shaughnessey - natural position, 4-3 DE probably. Good run defender, average pass rusher
Kelly - natural position, no idea. 4-3 UT probably, but oversized for that. Poor run defender, one on one player, pass rusher.
Seymour - natural 3-4 DE
Houston - probably best fit for 4-3 UT, too slow for 4-3 DE in pass rush.
Tollefson - 4-3 DE role player
Bilukidi - no idea, tweener between NT size and UT skills in a 4-3
Crawford - built more for either undersized 3-4 DE, oversized for 4-3 DE.
Burris - 4-3 OLB
Wheeler - cover 2 OLB
McClain - 3-4 ILB
Huff - Single high FS playing CB, sucks at both
Branch - SS with bad cover skills
Bartell - run defensive 4-3 CB - zone and man guy
Spencer - run defensive CB, zone guy


Now don't nitpick every single player, because I'm not an expert on every bit of that. My point is that one day I looked at the roster and all I saw was guys whose best schemes don't mesh with eachother, and quite a few who were playing out of their natural and best position. What scheme do they all fit in?

Bringing me back to the first point. The Packers and Giants may draft height, weight, speed, but they usually do it within the confines of what fits their scheme. The Raiders drafted the best athlete and dumped it on the coaches to contend with how to make them fit. And I am saying there is no way to make them fit. You can do it with a few misfits (i.e. Kiwanuka on the Giants), but you put a whole defense full of misfit roles out there and all you get is an undisciplined disorganized mess. Which is what we have had.
You can buck the trend and fit a guy here or there in a less than ideal role, but this whole defense was drafted without paying any mind to position and scheme, as far as what is natural to them or their best positions. Height, weight, speed ruled quite a bit too much. Now it's unfulfilled potential and guys everywhere out of position.

Look at what is happening right now as these guys are being asked to expand their defense beyond man to man, single high safety, 4 man natural rush which is the simplest defense to play in the league. The more they are asked to do - bad becomes worse. Because they can't do it. They don't fit, they don't have roles and certainly not roles they are capable of playing, and they don't have any idea how to play as a unit for 2 reasons - every guy out there is a man on an island put there and drafted to beat his man, and there is no scheme in which they all fit together. The Raiders defense has pieces and small groupings of what 6 totally different teams might have..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5364
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Darkness wrote:
holyghost wrote:
Raidin wrote:
Not sure why people think this system doesn't suit Palmer. It suits him far more then getting him to fling the ball down field so he can turn it over.


+1 on that.
If the current play of the team indicates anything, it's that it suits Palmer more than any other player we have. He's the only one thriving aside from Myers. Build around the QB, what a novel idea..


"thriving"? Laughing Brick wall


What's up bro, are you just stalking me individually here in the forum, trolling one person because they support the current team and disagree with your shortsighted perspective?

Who's playing best on our offense right now? No point in even saying our best player is on D, because it's currently the worst performing defense in the league. Hence, noone on that side of the ball is good. Can't be our Special Teams, because it's been awful.

So let me rephrase to keep you from trolling my posts and nitpicking every word I write. If one player on our team can be considered thriving, who would it be? Aside from Myers, who I already mentioned.

I mean, what kind of a troll shows up in a post nitpicking one word because of the word choice. Choose a better word then, and at least attempt to engage in intelligent discussion rather than trolling my posts, ya troll.


How about no one's thriving? You realize that just because Carson Palmer looks good throwing the ball, doesn't mean he's being successful. Thriving and playing well are two completely different things. If Carson Palmer was thriving, we'd be scoring more points, converting better on 3rd down, and seeing the redzone far more often. None of those things are his fault, but the fault of his scheme, which is why it's ludicrous to say any part of the offense is thriving.

I get that you like sticking up for Greg Knapp at any chance you can, but I find it funny that you're trying to make it seem like Knapp's offense is built around the QB just because we can't run the ball. You'll deny that, but that's really the logic you're using.


Fine. Noone is thriving. But Palmer is playing as well as anyone we have, and that was the meaning of my point.

I am not and have not stuck up for Greg Knapp. Please read my posts. My point on Knapp is that I feel this team has much bigger problems. My point in general. But as I assume you will do, feel free to go back through my posts, pull out one sentence out of context and meaning and try to expose it word by word to prove your own point, which is what exactly?

My OPINION, is that Knapp is not our biggest problem. I don't even believe he is in the top five of our team's problems. My Opinion. Firing him is a non issue to me, because the team will still be suffering greatly from other significant issues.


Knapp would definitely make my top 5. What are five issues you think are more troubling than him? Just asking for discussion purposes.


In no particular order, my top 5 are:

-CBs (More the injuries to our CBs)
-Lack of depth (DB, RB especially)
-LBs not named Wheeler
-Lack of pass rush
-Run blocking

I dont like the playcalling, but if our guys could run block effectively I honestly think the playcalling wouldnt be as much of a factor since McFadden would be rolling. Then again, the run blocking issues are mainly on the ZBS right now, which was Knapp's doing so I dont know if that puts him in my top 5 or not- I guess indirectly it does?


Respectfully, but vehemently disagree. The overwhelming consensus around here for a winning formula was : Same PBS vertical offense + run defense - league leading penalties = competitive. That's ALL DA had to do. The only assumption in this equation is that Saunders would be able to run HueJax's offense. Knapp's offense IS the problem because the lack of offense is the major contributor to exposing the defense. If the Raiders EVER had a lead they might be able to pin their ears back and blitzkrieg the opposition. A layman could have solved this equation. DA tried to reinvent the wheel. FAIL.


You however forget other details. Like schedules, other teams changes, injuries and so on.


Plus my reasoning was that if we could fix all that other stuff, our defense would be better, McFadden would be himself, and our offense would take off. Maybe not like it would in the old offense, but coupled with a better defense and a very good run game, our team would be looking pretty good. If I replaced Knapp instead of LBs or CBs, then our offense would be good but our D would still be weak. IDK, I wasn't saying I'm absolutely right, that was just my line of thinking.
_________________


Silver&Black88 on the sig

La_Vader wrote:
I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1006
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
Respectfully, but vehemently disagree. The overwhelming consensus around here for a winning formula was : Same PBS vertical offense + run defense - league leading penalties = competitive. That's ALL DA had to do. The only assumption in this equation is that Saunders would be able to run HueJax's offense. Knapp's offense IS the problem because the lack of offense is the major contributor to exposing the defense. If the Raiders EVER had a lead they might be able to pin their ears back and blitzkrieg the opposition. A layman could have solved this equation. DA tried to reinvent the wheel. FAIL.


Pretty much my line of thinking. The defense had to be overhauled, and especially with the lack of picks and time there were obviously going to be issues so why take the offense completely apart aswell and make a mess of the whole thing??

IMO it would have been better to keep some semblance of continuity with the offense, rework the Defence with the expectation that the offence could help out the defensive rebuild by at least being able to move the ball and put points on the board. Right now we are stuck with neither side of the ball helping the other.

Also one other thing is if we were having success on the offensive side of the ball and Palmer is putting up good numbers and McFadden is leading the league in rushing again at least they become valuable comodities for trade if thats the way we want to go, right now we are lowering both players value and that of the rest of our offensive players especially to a ZBS team.
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3649
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 7:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This post is for all you guys that keep saying it's not the coaches fault the Raiders have no talent.
The Saints are 0-4 with 5 All-Pros on the roaster.
Let me see what are they missing? Oh that's right it's Sean Payton the coach.
The coaches can make or break a team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22505
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
This post is for all you guys that keep saying it's not the coaches fault the Raiders have no talent.
The Saints are 0-4 with 5 All-Pros on the roaster.
Let me see what are they missing? Oh that's right it's Sean Payton the coach.
The coaches can make or break a team.


However they have Steve Spagnuolo as their DC and a worse defense than the Raiders right?

You know, Steve Spagnuolo who was a standout DC for the Giants that earned him a HC job in St. Louis. The architect of the defense that stopped the undefeated Patriots from a Superbowl.

So let's see, awesome DC for the Giants turned horrible DC in NO. Could talent have something to do with that?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1006
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
bitty wrote:
This post is for all you guys that keep saying it's not the coaches fault the Raiders have no talent.
The Saints are 0-4 with 5 All-Pros on the roaster.
Let me see what are they missing? Oh that's right it's Sean Payton the coach.
The coaches can make or break a team.


However they have Steve Spagnuolo as their DC and a worse defense than the Raiders right?

You know, Steve Spagnuolo who was a standout DC for the Giants that earned him a HC job in St. Louis. The architect of the defense that stopped the undefeated Patriots from a Superbowl.

So let's see, awesome DC for the Giants turned horrible DC in NO. Could talent have something to do with that?


Things are never black and white, the truth is you need decent talent, good coaching and some good fortune. Watching the Saints this year, there is a dropoff in coaching no doubt, but also they haven't been far off and easily could have been 3-1 or 2-2 (Brees has been a little erratic also not just the D).

At the moment the problem with the Raiders as I see it is that the talent level is mediocre (less in the depleted secondary) and the coaching is mediocre - we have a rookie DC in Tarver and its the first new system we've had for 40 years so it's to be expected. We need a bit of good fortune with injuries and i'm confident over the course of the season our defense at least will improve.
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3649
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
bitty wrote:
This post is for all you guys that keep saying it's not the coaches fault the Raiders have no talent.
The Saints are 0-4 with 5 All-Pros on the roaster.
Let me see what are they missing? Oh that's right it's Sean Payton the coach.
The coaches can make or break a team.


However they have Steve Spagnuolo as their DC and a worse defense than the Raiders right?

You know, Steve Spagnuolo who was a standout DC for the Giants that earned him a HC job in St. Louis. The architect of the defense that stopped the undefeated Patriots from a Superbowl.

So let's see, awesome DC for the Giants turned horrible DC in NO. Could talent have something to do with that?


Things are never black and white, the truth is you need decent talent, good coaching and some good fortune. Watching the Saints this year, there is a dropoff in coaching no doubt, but also they haven't been far off and easily could have been 3-1 or 2-2 (Brees has been a little erratic also not just the D).

At the moment the problem with the Raiders as I see it is that the talent level is mediocre (less in the depleted secondary) and the coaching is mediocre - we have a rookie DC in Tarver and its the first new system we've had for 40 years so it's to be expected. We need a bit of good fortune with injuries and i'm confident over the course of the season our defense at least will improve.

Not one part of the Raiders stay the same or got better every single part is worse off this year.
Offense, Defense and Special Teams everything took a huge step back this year.How is not fair catching the ball inside the ten, long returns against the Raiders or Blocking on the punt team, not a coaching thing.The biggest mistake the Raiders made was hiring people with no experience. The GM, HC, DC had no experience at all and Knapp got fired every time he was an OC.I like Reggie as GM but he needs an experienced HC to help run the team for the first few years.
DA should be an good coach in a few years but he makes mistakes every game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1006
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
Not one part of the Raiders stay the same or got better every single part is worse off this year.
Offense, Defense and Special Teams everything took a huge step back this year.How is not fair catching the ball inside the ten, long returns against the Raiders or Blocking on the punt team, not a coaching thing.The biggest mistake the Raiders made was hiring people with no experience. The GM, HC, DC had no experience at all and Knapp got fired every time he was an OC.I like Reggie as GM but he needs an experienced HC to help run the team for the first few years.
DA should be an good coach in a few years but he makes mistakes every game.


I don't disagree with you that we have regressed in every department, but specifically on defence we have lost Curry to injury, Routt and Wimbley (not a huge fan of either but Routt would be our best CB now and Wimbley at least got to the QB), Shaggy is coming off a serious knee injury and Seymour looks like father time has caught up with him. Players we have added are either injured or not equal in talent to last years players (Wheeler may be the exception). Therefore the overall talent on the defense, particularly the CBs has taken a hit, the coaching is not worse IMO and will get better with more experience.

In hindsight, as you say it was asking for trouble hiring a Rookie GM, HC, DC. Although i do think Reggie, Dennis Allen and Jason Tarver will all be good in the long run, the experience of Saunders as OC would have compensated a little maybe.
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group