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

#Pryor'sBrigade.. He would of been a top 3 pick this year
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 45, 46, 47 ... 96, 97, 98  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 10991
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Didn't he false start in that one play VS KC last season also??.... on fourth down? Comparing Tebow to Pryor is just wrong LOL
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 10991
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LOL yep. Pryor came in one play last season and on 3rd and 1, he committed a false start.... the QB.... he's prepared alright LOL. Brought Boller right back in the very next play.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 20470
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 20470
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
LOL yep. Pryor came in one play last season and on 3rd and 1, he committed a false start.... the QB.... he's prepared alright LOL. Brought Boller right back in the very next play.


Yeah cause a bunch of QBs come in from motion to run a QB sneak. I mean im sure a lot of QBs would have got that right for their first NFL play.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5299
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCOUGHMAN wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
holyghost wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
holyghost wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
holyghost wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
I've started to hate Pryor for no fault of his own. Hearing these retarded rants about playing him has poisoned him for me. I hope he's gone next year so I don't have to put up with this ish any more.


+1

It's the Raiders version of Tebow. Can you imagine if he hit the field went 5-22 but had 1 nice TD throw and ran for a 100 yards.

This place would break the internet.


only if we won.

you guys forget winning cures everything.

thats the only reason why tebow was tolerated.


JEEZ.
Tebow was tolerated long enough to finish out the year. Have you forgot they dumped him for a 4th round pick as fast as they could? I guess winning didn't cure that.
was that before or after signing manning?


Weak. As if singing Manning wasn't their agenda and dumping Tebow was just a good idea after the fact. What the hell logic are you using. Winning with Tebow didn't cure anything, which you didn't respond to the first time and won't now.


um i said winning was the only reason tebow was tolerated for so long.
what the hell logic are you using? if the donkeys didnt sign mannning who do you think would be starting?

sure tebow couldnt throw but he could win. winning cured the donkey fans from going ballistic. winning cured the locker room from turning on eachother. winning cured their playoff drought. winning cured their 2011 season. winning imo even got DA his HC gig etc etc


I genuinely think if Manning wasn't signed Brock Oswelier would be starting right now and not Tebow. Noone wants Tebow starting for them.
Tebow didn't win, it's a team game. Willis McGahee and Von Miller (and others) did a whole heck of alot to help that winning happen. And even then they struggled for 8-8.


i agree it is a team game but the qb is the face of the team imo and gets the praise when they win and the blame when the lose.

also denver sucked before tebow took over and led them on a 5 game win streak i think it was. what was willis, von and other doing before tebow stepped in. i hate tebow but he beat us and turned den from bottom of the afc west to a playoff team.


If Tebow were starting for Denver this year, they would not be going to the playoffs. That goofy defense was new and different, it caught defenses by surprise. We saw the same thing with Miami and the Wildcat a few years back: new type of offense, defenses only have a week or so to prepare for defending something totally different, after the season they have more time to study and adjust, next season that offense is useless.


iirc didnt tebow play a more conventional type of offense vrs pitt and won


I'm fairly certain they ran the gimmickey offense just about every game Tebow started. Even if it was conventional vs. PIT, thats one game- he completed under 50% of his passes, and was awful in the second half (6/15, just one FG drive). The only reason they won was because he hit Thomas on an 18 yard pass and Thomas ran it another 62 yards for the OT win.
_________________


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
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5299
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.


What I'm saying though, is that Denver's staff saw enough in him to at least put him in on plays throughout his rookie and 2nd year, not just the games they started him. He was in on numerous runs and even some pass attempts throughout his rookie year before they stared him, before they were out of contention and before the staff ever said "the heck with it!" They had actually seen him have some success in real game action prior to giving him a start. Because of that, they had at least some reasoning behind giving him the reigns.

Pryor, on the other hand, hasnt even gotten a vote of confidence to take a single snap, let alone start a game. You could say Allen and Knapp just arent ballsy enough, or arent willing to take a chance, but to go through 2 different HC's and two different OC's and have none of them want to use him? Not even Hue, the ballsiest and most creative HC we've had in a long time tried putting him in aside from that one sneak attempt.
_________________


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
Django


Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 2604
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.


What I'm saying though, is that Denver's staff saw enough in him to at least put him in on plays throughout his rookie and 2nd year, not just the games they started him. He was in on numerous runs and even some pass attempts throughout his rookie year before they stared him, before they were out of contention and before the staff ever said "the heck with it!" They had actually seen him have some success in real game action prior to giving him a start. Because of that, they had at least some reasoning behind giving him the reigns.

Pryor, on the other hand, hasnt even gotten a vote of confidence to take a single snap, let alone start a game. You could say Allen and Knapp just arent ballsy enough, or arent willing to take a chance, but to go through 2 different HC's and two different OC's and have none of them want to use him? Not even Hue, the ballsiest and most creative HC we've had in a long time tried putting him in aside from that one sneak attempt.


No. Tebow only played his rookie year (coming off the bench for a couple plays) and thats because he was Josh McDaniels guy. By the 2nd year he was just a regular backup that got no reps under John Fox. Once Kyle Orton officially was crap....then they put in Tebow.

So in terms of the Pryor....Carson has played too well for the coaching staff to think of Pryor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 10991
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
LOL yep. Pryor came in one play last season and on 3rd and 1, he committed a false start.... the QB.... he's prepared alright LOL. Brought Boller right back in the very next play.


Yeah cause a bunch of QBs come in from motion to run a QB sneak. I mean im sure a lot of QBs would have got that right for their first NFL play.


Well he shouldn't have false started. Not saying he had an ample chance but he says he's always prepared......
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5299
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Django wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.


What I'm saying though, is that Denver's staff saw enough in him to at least put him in on plays throughout his rookie and 2nd year, not just the games they started him. He was in on numerous runs and even some pass attempts throughout his rookie year before they stared him, before they were out of contention and before the staff ever said "the heck with it!" They had actually seen him have some success in real game action prior to giving him a start. Because of that, they had at least some reasoning behind giving him the reigns.

Pryor, on the other hand, hasnt even gotten a vote of confidence to take a single snap, let alone start a game. You could say Allen and Knapp just arent ballsy enough, or arent willing to take a chance, but to go through 2 different HC's and two different OC's and have none of them want to use him? Not even Hue, the ballsiest and most creative HC we've had in a long time tried putting him in aside from that one sneak attempt.


No. Tebow only played his rookie year (coming off the bench for a couple plays) and thats because he was Josh McDaniels guy. By the 2nd year he was just a regular backup that got no reps under John Fox. Once Kyle Orton officially was crap....then they put in Tebow.

So in terms of the Pryor....Carson has played too well for the coaching staff to think of Pryor.


Right, but like I said he got playing time during his rookie year, whether he was a McDaniels guy or not, he was simply using a guy the best way he saw fit, which was not as a starter, but in on some plays here and there because he was able to make some plays. Either Pryor really looks that bad in practice, or Allen, Knapp, Hue, and Saunders are all just too blind to his ability to put him in, even sparingly.
_________________


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
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 20470
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
Django wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.


What I'm saying though, is that Denver's staff saw enough in him to at least put him in on plays throughout his rookie and 2nd year, not just the games they started him. He was in on numerous runs and even some pass attempts throughout his rookie year before they stared him, before they were out of contention and before the staff ever said "the heck with it!" They had actually seen him have some success in real game action prior to giving him a start. Because of that, they had at least some reasoning behind giving him the reigns.

Pryor, on the other hand, hasnt even gotten a vote of confidence to take a single snap, let alone start a game. You could say Allen and Knapp just arent ballsy enough, or arent willing to take a chance, but to go through 2 different HC's and two different OC's and have none of them want to use him? Not even Hue, the ballsiest and most creative HC we've had in a long time tried putting him in aside from that one sneak attempt.


No. Tebow only played his rookie year (coming off the bench for a couple plays) and thats because he was Josh McDaniels guy. By the 2nd year he was just a regular backup that got no reps under John Fox. Once Kyle Orton officially was crap....then they put in Tebow.

So in terms of the Pryor....Carson has played too well for the coaching staff to think of Pryor.


Right, but like I said he got playing time during his rookie year, whether he was a McDaniels guy or not, he was simply using a guy the best way he saw fit, which was not as a starter, but in on some plays here and there because he was able to make some plays. Either Pryor really looks that bad in practice, or Allen, Knapp, Hue, and Saunders are all just too blind to his ability to put him in, even sparingly.


When would he get it though. Hue wasnt going to play Pryor after he had traded the house for his guy. He gave his guy all the snaps. He needed his guy to take as many snaps in practice and on the field as humanly possible to try to justify the trade and make a run for playoffs. This year is a new coaching staff, Pryor has to learn a new play book and was put behind to vets. Tebow was in the same exact boat in Denver in his second year. New coaching staff, new play book, and two vets in front of him, and he got his shot.

Also im sick of hearing about what he may or may not do in practice. If practice is what they are basing who they play on the field each Sunday, aint nobody on this team except Reece doing anything worth mentioning in practice IMO. If they feel the season isnt lost yet so be it. But if it is about seeing what kind of young talent we have on this team its time for pryor to play. Its funny though cause when people want to see Bilukidi or Crawford play nobody brings up the practice argument.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Django


Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 2604
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
Django wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
Also Tebow was third string when he got his shot for a losing team. So you can stop bringing up that third string crap already.


Theres a big difference between Tebow, who was used throughout the 2010 season both passing and running, and Pryor, who has been in on one play in 2 seasons, under 2 different head coaches and 2 different offensive coordinators. That means 4 different coaches have seen the same thing as each other over two year's worth of practices that have made them decide there isnt even a place for him as a backup or in a trick play.


Yeah the difference has nothing to do with the players on the field. Its about the character or perceive character of the players. I mean from all reports, Tebow was never good in practice, and was a terrible practice player. How did he get on the field? A coaching staff said the heck with it, we aint winning anyway lets try something different, if it dont work its a wash anyway.


What I'm saying though, is that Denver's staff saw enough in him to at least put him in on plays throughout his rookie and 2nd year, not just the games they started him. He was in on numerous runs and even some pass attempts throughout his rookie year before they stared him, before they were out of contention and before the staff ever said "the heck with it!" They had actually seen him have some success in real game action prior to giving him a start. Because of that, they had at least some reasoning behind giving him the reigns.

Pryor, on the other hand, hasnt even gotten a vote of confidence to take a single snap, let alone start a game. You could say Allen and Knapp just arent ballsy enough, or arent willing to take a chance, but to go through 2 different HC's and two different OC's and have none of them want to use him? Not even Hue, the ballsiest and most creative HC we've had in a long time tried putting him in aside from that one sneak attempt.


No. Tebow only played his rookie year (coming off the bench for a couple plays) and thats because he was Josh McDaniels guy. By the 2nd year he was just a regular backup that got no reps under John Fox. Once Kyle Orton officially was crap....then they put in Tebow.

So in terms of the Pryor....Carson has played too well for the coaching staff to think of Pryor.


Right, but like I said he got playing time during his rookie year, whether he was a McDaniels guy or not, he was simply using a guy the best way he saw fit, which was not as a starter, but in on some plays here and there because he was able to make some plays. Either Pryor really looks that bad in practice, or Allen, Knapp, Hue, and Saunders are all just too blind to his ability to put him in, even sparingly.


Here is another way of looking at it. Maybe Pryor doesnt look really bad...but he's not the 2nd best QB on the team. So why dress 3 QBs when that would take an important player off special teams. Most teams dress just 2 QBs now anyway.

And as far as them not using him...well its Greg Knapp thats the OC. This guy doesnt even know how to use Palmer. What makes any of us think he would know how to use Pryor?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5239
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:

Also im sick of hearing about what he may or may not do in practice. If practice is what they are basing who they play on the field each Sunday, aint nobody on this team except Reece doing anything worth mentioning in practice IMO. If they feel the season isnt lost yet so be it. But if it is about seeing what kind of young talent we have on this team its time for pryor to play. Its funny though cause when people want to see Bilukidi or Crawford play nobody brings up the practice argument.


I've never seen anyone calling for Crawford. Just one lone person asking where he went? Bilukidi is 2nd string, so you'd expect to see his time increase. When Pryor beats out Leinart for backup his playing time will be more feasible to me. Your putting the cart before the horse. I love the "but I shine on the big stage coach" argument you're trying to deploy for Pryor. I've heard it many times and none of those guys ever got on the field. Eerily similar to Tebow. It's scary. Just cut this dude already so we all move on. . . .
_________________
2013 Mancrush: DT Richardson, OT Joeckel, FS Vaccaro, FS Rambo, WR Dobson, RB Michael, TE McDonald, OT Foketi, WR Swope
Raidin wrote:
My love for Rod is growing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 20470
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
dante9876 wrote:

Also im sick of hearing about what he may or may not do in practice. If practice is what they are basing who they play on the field each Sunday, aint nobody on this team except Reece doing anything worth mentioning in practice IMO. If they feel the season isnt lost yet so be it. But if it is about seeing what kind of young talent we have on this team its time for pryor to play. Its funny though cause when people want to see Bilukidi or Crawford play nobody brings up the practice argument.


I've never seen anyone calling for Crawford. Just one lone person asking where he went? Bilukidi is 2nd string, so you'd expect to see his time increase. When Pryor beats out Leinawrt for backup his playing time will be more feasible to me. Your putting the cart before the horse. I love the "but I shine on the big stage coach" argument you're trying to deploy for Pryor. I've heard it many times and none of those guys ever got on the field. Eerily similar to Tebow. It's scary. Just cut this dude already so we all move on. . . .


First I apologize if I give the impression that he is going to be good. I don't think that at all. Also there is no point in playing lienart cause we all including coaches know what he is. Also let's not act like Matt earned the backup job. He is a vet that knows the playbook. Pryor would had to be peyton manning in practice with very limited snaps to get close to second string. Just let the dude get his feet wet in some real game situations. If he sucks they can cut him without any repercussions. Unless you think sitting palmer is going to hurt his feelings or something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 10991
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
First I apologize if I give the impression that he is going to be good. I don't think that at all. Also there is no point in playing lienart cause we all including coaches know what he is. Also let's not act like Matt earned the backup job. He is a vet that knows the playbook. Pryor would had to be peyton manning in practice with very limited snaps to get close to second string. Just let the dude get his feet wet in some real game situations. If he sucks they can cut him without any repercussions. Unless you think sitting palmer is going to hurt his feelings or something.


If that's the only reason Matt is on the team, wouldn't that make it easier for Pryor to beat him out? I mean, he's practicing, he's making throws... it's not like he just passing out water waiting to get on the practice field. If he were even remotely impressing people and Leinart was in fact on the team for the sole reason you say, it should be quite easy to beat him out if Pryor looks good, right?
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tacos


Joined: 13 Jan 2011
Posts: 1165
PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What we need to do to become a successful franchise again.

-Fire every coach
-Hire Chip Kelly
-Cut Palmer
-Pick up Vick
-Move Pryor to TE or RB so we have two fast QB's on the field to confuse opponents
-I'm just kidding

Although with our speed I admit it would be fun to watch.
_________________
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 ... 45, 46, 47 ... 96, 97, 98  Next
Page 46 of 98

 
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