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

New Offensive Coordinator
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 39, 40, 41  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22591
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TiberiusRising wrote:
"Turns out Darren McFadden was upset about sweep being called on Sunday. "I'd rather just go straight ahead on a third-and-1 call," he said."

Maybe DMAC should call the plays. At least he knows what should happen.


So what was his excuse on the 3rd and 1 later in the game when they went straight ahead and he was stuffed?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33440
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
"Turns out Darren McFadden was upset about sweep being called on Sunday. "I'd rather just go straight ahead on a third-and-1 call," he said."

Maybe DMAC should call the plays. At least he knows what should happen.


So what was his excuse on the 3rd and 1 later in the game when they went straight ahead and he was stuffed?


What was that site that posted all of the run plays and pass plays and everything? I always forget whenever I want to look at it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3165
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
"Turns out Darren McFadden was upset about sweep being called on Sunday. "I'd rather just go straight ahead on a third-and-1 call," he said."

Maybe DMAC should call the plays. At least he knows what should happen.


So what was his excuse on the 3rd and 1 later in the game when they went straight ahead and he was stuffed?


Palmer didn't open a hole. He's still adjusting to the zbs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33440
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chali21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
"Turns out Darren McFadden was upset about sweep being called on Sunday. "I'd rather just go straight ahead on a third-and-1 call," he said."

Maybe DMAC should call the plays. At least he knows what should happen.


So what was his excuse on the 3rd and 1 later in the game when they went straight ahead and he was stuffed?


Palmer didn't open a hole. He's still adjusting to the zbs.


Incorrect. The real reason is because Reggie McKenzie cut Pat Lee.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14283
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000114132/article/oakland-raiders-oc-greg-knapp-preaching-patience

Quote:
We've seen Darren McFadden fall off the map and the Raiders feel like a team pushing players into an offense that doesn't suit their talents. The better teams around the NFL play to the gifts of their personnel and the Raiders might benefit from a fresh look.

_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33440
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000114132/article/oakland-raiders-oc-greg-knapp-preaching-patience

Quote:
We've seen Darren McFadden fall off the map and the Raiders feel like a team pushing players into an offense that doesn't suit their talents. The better teams around the NFL play to the gifts of their personnel and the Raiders might benefit from a fresh look.


What's that? A NFL.com article written by a person with an IQ greater than 5 that makes sense and ISN'T completely trolling? I don't believe it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33440
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Oh, yeah, Heyward-Bey said. Im here, so I feel like Im probably a good piece."
Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5769
PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5907
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.


To suggest that the Raiders are building the team around Palmer would be to suggest that 1) Knapp was brought in specifically to accentuate Palmer's strengths and 2) the Raiders are under the impression Palmer is the QBotF. Evidence suggests neither one is the case yet this continues to be the prevailing assumption.

Palmer will continue to take a weekly beating and hold down the fort until the FO can improve the overall quality of the roster enough to draft the QBotF. Weak supporting cast is the #1 reason young QBs fail. Be it Pryor or any other young QB it would be dumb to throw them into this whirlwind and risk shell-shock. (a la David Carr or Sanchez)
_________________
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
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3165
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
holyghost wrote:
One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.


To suggest that the Raiders are building the team around Palmer would be to suggest that 1) Knapp was brought in specifically to accentuate Palmer's strengths and 2) the Raiders are under the impression Palmer is the QBotF. Evidence suggests neither one is the case yet this continues to be the prevailing assumption.

Palmer will continue to take a weekly beating and hold down the fort until the FO can improve the overall quality of the roster enough to draft the QBotF. Weak supporting cast is the #1 reason young QBs fail. Be it Pryor or any other young QB it would be dumb to throw them into this whirlwind and risk shell-shock. (a la David Carr or Sanchez)


Ehh Sanchez wasn't shell shocked, he never really had a number 1 receiver and isn't all that good.
I do agree that the supporting cast isn't there I mean Rodgers and manning wouldn't even succeed with this team with everyone dropping passes plus instability on the oline.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33440
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chali21 wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:
holyghost wrote:
One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.


To suggest that the Raiders are building the team around Palmer would be to suggest that 1) Knapp was brought in specifically to accentuate Palmer's strengths and 2) the Raiders are under the impression Palmer is the QBotF. Evidence suggests neither one is the case yet this continues to be the prevailing assumption.

Palmer will continue to take a weekly beating and hold down the fort until the FO can improve the overall quality of the roster enough to draft the QBotF. Weak supporting cast is the #1 reason young QBs fail. Be it Pryor or any other young QB it would be dumb to throw them into this whirlwind and risk shell-shock. (a la David Carr or Sanchez)


Ehh Sanchez wasn't shell shocked, he never really had a number 1 receiver and isn't all that good.
I do agree that the supporting cast isn't there I mean Rodgers and manning wouldn't even succeed with this team with everyone dropping passes plus instability on the oline.


Sanchez is a bum. Plain and simple. Holmes, Keller, Cotchery and Edwards was a fine crew of pass catchers. And the Jets had an elite OL back then. And a top notch defense. And LT and Shonn Greene.

Now that his team around him isn't amazing, he's crumbling into the worst QB in the NFL. He is the reason he sucks, no one else. If he didn't, he wouldn't be getting benched for Greg Mackelroy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5769
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
holyghost wrote:
One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.


To suggest that the Raiders are building the team around Palmer would be to suggest that 1) Knapp was brought in specifically to accentuate Palmer's strengths and 2) the Raiders are under the impression Palmer is the QBotF. Evidence suggests neither one is the case yet this continues to be the prevailing assumption.

Palmer will continue to take a weekly beating and hold down the fort until the FO can improve the overall quality of the roster enough to draft the QBotF. Weak supporting cast is the #1 reason young QBs fail. Be it Pryor or any other young QB it would be dumb to throw them into this whirlwind and risk shell-shock. (a la David Carr or Sanchez)


I never suggested the offense is or was built around Palmer. Learn to read.

I suggested that the idea and philosophy of building around your personnel is a bad philosophy for this team, particularly this team, because all of our significant skill position personnel is deeply flawed in one way or another.

Suggesting we are both perfectly ripe for a rebuild both in terms of personnel and system. And I suggested that the system won't change for the players because the players are not worth building a system around for many reasons. The mistake the average Raider fan makes - a new regime comes into a place like Minnesota for example, and they build an offense around Adrian Peterson. Why, because he is a great player. A new regime comes into a place like Oakland for example and builds an offense around McFadden. Why, because they are retarded. Because Darren McFadden, while a nice piece, is not nearly the consistent performer Adrian Peterson is. You don't build your offense arond what we have, because what we have is ovverrated, inconcsistent, and unreliable. And when this personnel fails you, you don't have an offense any more because it is built around the failure.

People here act like it's a disservice to them as fans that the new regime used the ZBS and the offense and cheated the team out of a successful offense by not building to the strengths of the skill players. And I'm suggesting that it's a disservice to them to continue what was in place, because it's ceiling is severely limited. I believe in the rebuild. Not saying I believe in Knapp, just the idea of a rebuild. And I am against suiting the system to Palmer, McFadden, DHB, Moore, Ford, etc. Because none of them are long term reliable when it comes to creating consistency and championships.

People around here forgot what long term means.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5907
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
Baggabonez wrote:
holyghost wrote:
One facet people may be discounting. Maybe Oakland isn't interested in fitting the scheme to the personnel because they don't like the personnel?

Once again we come back to the utter absurdity of building an offense around a 33 year old QB, an injury prone running back, and 3 speed receivers with problems catching the ball. It sure may have won us more games this year but still there is a gaping issue with the philosophy of this team on offense if it stayed the way it was. It is utterly dependent on physical advantage - size, speed, talent, a dinosaur offense in this league. Even if we play that way, there are teams better than us on every level who can beat us at it. Hence, why we were never better than 8-8 and often worse.

I believe in ZBS and our offensive changes for many reasons, I just think there has to be other facets mixed in, such as not being a moron and calling zone sweep on short yardage. And not misusing your most versatile player, and not misusing your wideouts unning routes they don't excel at. And I believe in pieces of this offensive philosophy, I just don't believe in the current personnel being fit for it (nor are they fit to be a part of a consistent successful offense of any kind) and I don't believe Knapp is the one who can take us where we want to be.

Don't forget that consistency was still a major issue with Hue's offenses. You can't have your offense fall dead asleep 6 weeks a year and still expect to win games. It's a product of a risk reward system based on physical dominance and hoping for good matchups.


There's things we lack this year on offense that tell the whole story.

1. Misfit personnel to system. I say changeover personnel, not system. DHB, McFadden, Ford, Palmer, all eventually are not the right pieces in any consistent offense, because they're just not consistent. It takes time to make over personnel.
2. Misuse of the existing successful things we had, and very slow to adjust. Such as DHB running anything other 5-15 yard comebacks. He can do it, let him do it. And what happened to Reece half the damn year? And where are the screens, which we can do? And goddamn I have had enough of the fades in the end zone. We don't have a fade in the end zone jump ball player. Why can't Palmer throw routes over the middle in the end zone, or slants, to a guy like myers or DHB, or Criner? Dumb.. Dumb because we keep doing a handful of things across the board that will never work.
3. Idiot play calls a baby wouldn't make. Such as the 3rd and 1 sweeps. Just don't.. It doesn't happen very often, but they're drive killers when they do and shouldn't happen at all. Never call a play that risks penetration, and takes time to develop, in short yardage.


To suggest that the Raiders are building the team around Palmer would be to suggest that 1) Knapp was brought in specifically to accentuate Palmer's strengths and 2) the Raiders are under the impression Palmer is the QBotF. Evidence suggests neither one is the case yet this continues to be the prevailing assumption.

Palmer will continue to take a weekly beating and hold down the fort until the FO can improve the overall quality of the roster enough to draft the QBotF. Weak supporting cast is the #1 reason young QBs fail. Be it Pryor or any other young QB it would be dumb to throw them into this whirlwind and risk shell-shock. (a la David Carr or Sanchez)


I never suggested the offense is or was built around Palmer. Learn to read.

I suggested that the idea and philosophy of building around your personnel is a bad philosophy for this team, particularly this team, because all of our significant skill position personnel is deeply flawed in one way or another.

Suggesting we are both perfectly ripe for a rebuild both in terms of personnel and system. And I suggested that the system won't change for the players because the players are not worth building a system around for many reasons. The mistake the average Raider fan makes - a new regime comes into a place like Minnesota for example, and they build an offense around Adrian Peterson. Why, because he is a great player. A new regime comes into a place like Oakland for example and builds an offense around McFadden. Why, because they are retarded. Because Darren McFadden, while a nice piece, is not nearly the consistent performer Adrian Peterson is. You don't build your offense arond what we have, because what we have is ovverrated, inconcsistent, and unreliable. And when this personnel fails you, you don't have an offense any more because it is built around the failure.

People here act like it's a disservice to them as fans that the new regime used the ZBS and the offense and cheated the team out of a successful offense by not building to the strengths of the skill players. And I'm suggesting that it's a disservice to them to continue what was in place, because it's ceiling is severely limited. I believe in the rebuild. Not saying I believe in Knapp, just the idea of a rebuild. And I am against suiting the system to Palmer, McFadden, DHB, Moore, Ford, etc. Because none of them are long term reliable when it comes to creating consistency and championships.

People around here forgot what long term means.


While you may not believe that the Raiders are building around Palmer there are quite a few who do when in reality the FO is just trying to improve the quality of depth.

In regards to the bold, people forget that previous to 2011 Kubiak was on the hot seat and almost got fired. Implementing the ZBS in a similar fashion, with a 4 year turnaround, will get most HCs fired. It's tough to prove how smart you are without a job.

When you compare what most new coaches have done fans expect to see improved play even if it doesn't translate to wins.
_________________
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: 5769
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with everything you said.

And if the fans could give this staff and team just 1, 1 legitimate offseason to see if they can shape their team and show improvement, well... then they might have something to complain about if they fail.

And whatever other new coaches have done is irrelevant. Because I know without even delving into it that every single one of them inherited a vastly better situation in all aspects.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dawsonleery


Joined: 31 Oct 2012
Posts: 711
PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does everyone agree if Knapp stays the core of the talent on the offense will be out? Palmer, McFadden, DHB and maybe even Moore?
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 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 39, 40, 41  Next
Page 9 of 41

 
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