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

Watching the 9ers makes me believe in Pryor
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
thebeyonder


Joined: 30 Dec 2012
Posts: 324
PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
thebeyonder wrote:
I still don't see any upside in Palmer. He's already shown he can't lift this franchise to the playoffs or superbowl, and the potential for improvement is not apparent. Carson a veteran QB with nothing to offer but wasted cap space. Starting Pryor or at least grooming him to take the starting spot is the right thing to do.

He's among the fastest QBs in the league, rivalling RG3 in full stride. The potential with the hard-to-defend read option is there. He has the physical tools and can brush off defenders like Cam. I know his footwork needs work but the worst case scenario is that he fails and the team gets a #1 pick next year.


And he costs a coach his job. The staff is let go. The GM is under fire. It's anarchy among the fan base.

Starting a QB who can't pass the ball consistently or with much accuracy will NEVER be the 'right thing to do'.

You have to earn the job in practice and in the offseason. If he beats out the other QBs, then I will support him starting. If he's starting 'because why not?' then I seriously question the coaches ability.

You start the guy who earns the job. You don't give it to a guy because he's young and fast.


Would you rather we keep Allen or get a first round QB like Manziel or Bridgwater? Who wins championships, first round QB talent or questionable head coaches who might end up getting canned anyway?

What is Allen so adept at that you think he's irreplaceable and worth keeping over a potential franchise QB? Surely you aren't talking about the Knapp fiasco. The management must do what is good for the team, not what the fans think. Firing Allen for a franchise QB is a good trade any day of the week.

The notion Allen would be fired after a failed Pryor campaign isn't even a foregone conclusion if he explains his plan thoroughly enough beforehand. There's no harm in betting on potential and reaping the records (franchise QB Pryor or franchise QB Manziel/Bridgwater) regardless of what happens. That's called thinking ahead of the curve.

Palmer is ranked 18th among QBs in Defense-adjusted yards above replacement, below all recent #1 and 2# picks plus Kaepernick and barring Luck at 19. That means Palmer as a veteran ranks near the bottom of recent years' #1 and #2 pick ability and is just two spots above Dalton at 20. An important thing to note is that Dalton and Luck can improve and there are no recent #1 and #2 picks below Luck's position.

This trend for me means that there is a good chance we land a QB at or near current Palmer's level if we get the top pick next year. And if we don't need that player, Pryor will have proven himself so we win anyway. Razz

As respects the rest of your post:

You give the starting position to whoever deserves it based on what's best in the short and/or long term, depending on your thinking. Potential has to be a factor given player's tendency to develop. Laughing . Believe it or not but coaches factor in youth and athletic ability into sporting decisions in general, and not just in football. In soccer veterans are sometimes shipped off in favor of up-and-coming talented young players. There's only so many players on a roster in any sport and an aging player, even one that still holds value, is still an aging player. You can trade him now and get something, in addition to giving your rookie a chance to develop ,or you can wait until the veteran is worth nothing, your rookie is still lounging on the bench, and you've won nothing still. The latter is what you're proposing and it's absurd. Laughing

Cut Carson: free cap space, trade for something, develop Pryor, potentially get top QB in next year's draft. <-- Risky but lots of good value here. No guts no glory.

Keep Palmer: take up cap space, sit Pryor, win nothing anyway, potentially miss out on top QBs pick, keep hoping and believing. <-- Safe choice but dumb mismanagement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BBIB


Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 8771
PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the 49ers make the Super Bowl, let alone win it, the comparisons will be there. One can debate all day long about Pryor's ability as a passer but the similar builds combined with the copy cat league phenomenon, if Kaepernick shatters once and for all the myth that a "running QB" can't get a team to the Super Bowl, that does wonders for Pryor's stock at getting his chance to prove he can also thrive in a system built around his abilities

It does wonders in the chances that the Raiders wont draft a QB with their top pick or any high pick, all but assuring that Pryor is the guy next in line after Carson Palmer

So for those who want no part of Pryor, they better be rooting for my Falcons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Django


Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 2972
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
You have to earn the job in practice and in the offseason. If he beats out the other QBs, then I will support him starting. If he's starting 'because why not?' then I seriously question the coaches ability.

You start the guy who earns the job. You don't give it to a guy because he's young and fast.


This.


This. This. This.


To be FAIR...

If you go by the reports...

Jimmy Clausen was BETTER than Cam Newton in training camp. Cam had flashes. But in terms of consistency, execution. Jimmy was better. The coaches felt since the gap wasnt glaring and since they invested a high pick in Newton. Might as well start him....and not have him running the "Jimmy Clausen" offense.

RG3 WASNT better in terms of "traditional QBing" than Kirk Cousins in practice. A buddy of mines who works in that area told me the concerns about RG3 holding the ball too long...inaccuracy in the intermediate routes, etc etc.

The organization were behind both guys putting them in a position to succeed because they believed in their massive potential. They were right.

The only guy that flat out "beat out" a guy for a starting job that was a dual threat kind of guy......was Russell Wilson.

Colin Kaepernick was a guy that improved in practice to make the most of his opportunity as well.

Now is Pryor worth gambling on his potential? Can Pryor improve dramatically in practice once given more reps? Thats for the coaches to decide.

If ANYTHING he should be given. I say GIVE him the 2nd string job. Imo...Leinart was kind of given that job since he had such a huge advantage with knowing the system.

Let Pryor have the 2nd string job...if the 3rd string guy is just better...then demote Pryor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ch8878


Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 2620
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Raiders will keep Pryor 1 more season due to CAP issues then he'll be cut. Razz
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33448
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Django wrote:
To be FAIR...

If you go by the reports...

Jimmy Clausen was BETTER than Cam Newton in training camp. Cam had flashes. But in terms of consistency, execution. Jimmy was better. The coaches felt since the gap wasnt glaring and since they invested a high pick in Newton. Might as well start him....and not have him running the "Jimmy Clausen" offense.

RG3 WASNT better in terms of "traditional QBing" than Kirk Cousins in practice. A buddy of mines who works in that area told me the concerns about RG3 holding the ball too long...inaccuracy in the intermediate routes, etc etc.

The organization were behind both guys putting them in a position to succeed because they believed in their massive potential. They were right.

The only guy that flat out "beat out" a guy for a starting job that was a dual threat kind of guy......was Russell Wilson.

Colin Kaepernick was a guy that improved in practice to make the most of his opportunity as well.

Now is Pryor worth gambling on his potential? Can Pryor improve dramatically in practice once given more reps? Thats for the coaches to decide.

If ANYTHING he should be given. I say GIVE him the 2nd string job. Imo...Leinart was kind of given that job since he had such a huge advantage with knowing the system.

Let Pryor have the 2nd string job...if the 3rd string guy is just better...then demote Pryor.


So you're saying Pryor is on the same level as Newton, RG3, Kaep and Wilson? Sorry but I don't believe that. Give him the #2 spot sure, but he has to earn the right to compete for the #1 spot.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 12126
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BBIB wrote:
If the 49ers make the Super Bowl, let alone win it, the comparisons will be there. One can debate all day long about Pryor's ability as a passer but the similar builds combined with the copy cat league phenomenon, if Kaepernick shatters once and for all the myth that a "running QB" can't get a team to the Super Bowl, that does wonders for Pryor's stock at getting his chance to prove he can also thrive in a system built around his abilities

It does wonders in the chances that the Raiders wont draft a QB with their top pick or any high pick, all but assuring that Pryor is the guy next in line after Carson Palmer

So for those who want no part of Pryor, they better be rooting for my Falcons.


Pryor isn't even close to being on Kaep's level though so it's not the same. If our fans can't see that, then they need to rewatch everything.

I'm not gonna say who I'm rooting for in all this though LOL but it isn't the 9ers, I can guarantee that.
_________________


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


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 12126
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
So you're saying Pryor is on the same level as Newton, RG3, Kaep and Wilson? Sorry but I don't believe that. Give him the #2 spot sure, but he has to earn the right to compete for the #1 spot.


You're right about all this but the big thing is he earned the right to COMPETE. That is a solid point that people need to learn.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33448
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
So you're saying Pryor is on the same level as Newton, RG3, Kaep and Wilson? Sorry but I don't believe that. Give him the #2 spot sure, but he has to earn the right to compete for the #1 spot.


You're right about all this but the big thing is he earned the right to COMPETE. That is a solid point that people need to learn.


For what? #2? I think he's earned that barring us signing someone more qualified. He has not earned the right to challenge for the starting position and I don't know how anyone can claim otherwise. His sample size is just too small.

People bring up Palmer, which is kind of a part of the decision, but when it comes down to it, what has Pryor done to warrant the consideration? I know some young QBs get chances because of who they are or when they're drafted; and that's fine, but Pryor isn't one of those types. I wouldn't mind hearing reasoning that doesn't involve dumping on Palmer. Or reasoning that doesn't compare TP to QB's he really isn't that similar to. He has some qualities like Kaep, RG3 and SuperCam but at the core of it, he isn't the same kind of player or in the same kind of situation. It feels like a lot of the argument in his favor is predicated on hope and assumptions based off things we either haven't seen or haven't seen enough of.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 12126
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
So you're saying Pryor is on the same level as Newton, RG3, Kaep and Wilson? Sorry but I don't believe that. Give him the #2 spot sure, but he has to earn the right to compete for the #1 spot.


You're right about all this but the big thing is he earned the right to COMPETE. That is a solid point that people need to learn.


For what? #2? I think he's earned that barring us signing someone more qualified. He has not earned the right to challenge for the starting position and I don't know how anyone can claim otherwise. His sample size is just too small.

People bring up Palmer, which is kind of a part of the decision, but when it comes down to it, what has Pryor done to warrant the consideration? I know some young QBs get chances because of who they are or when they're drafted; and that's fine, but Pryor isn't one of those types. I wouldn't mind hearing reasoning that doesn't involve dumping on Palmer. Or reasoning that doesn't compare TP to QB's he really isn't that similar to. He has some qualities like Kaep, RG3 and SuperCam but at the core of it, he isn't the same kind of player or in the same kind of situation. It feels like a lot of the argument in his favor is predicated on hope and assumptions based off things we either haven't seen or haven't seen enough of.


I was going to say keep his job but yes, the number 2 is what I was leaning towards. This is Carson's job to lose and I have absolutely no doubt in that. I just hope he sticks around.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33448
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't take this as me bashing Pryor, but it really doesn't look to me like RMK is high on him:

Quote:
Q: Obviously running quarterbacks this year have had some success around the league. Do you assess his skills differently seeing that it can work?

McKenzie: Youíve still got to have the total package too. People talk about RG [Robert Griffin III] and [Russell] Wilson and [Colin] Kaepernick. You have to make the short, medium, long throws to be effective. When you play eight or nine in the box and just all off and come get you if you canít complete balls tooÖ


Quote:
Q: From a talent evaluation standpoint, as you see the league, at least some teams gravitating toward more quarterback oriented runs, does that make you evaluate the position any differently going forward?

McKenzie: Youíve got to evaluate. That doesnít mean you change your philosophy and youíre going to go strictly with an option running-type quarterback. Itís always nice to have options. If you can get a guy that can throw it, which all quarterbacks are going to have to be able to throw the football, then on top of that he can run it, thatís the old adage of being a dual threat. Get a defensive end that can play the run and rush the passer, thatís what you want. You got a dual threat with a guy thatís touching the ball every playÖso people are making a big deal out of it. If youíve got a guy that you have to watch out creating a lot of plays when things break down, making something out of nothing, thatís hard to defend.



Quote:
Q: Is that more dangerous to your way of thinking of making things that break down, then the read option plays that everybody is..?

McKenzie: Yeah, because the read option, you can defense that, but that read option and throwing the ball all around the field, itís hard. Thatís hard to defend.


It sounds like he's indirectly saying a lot here, imo. Like he respects the Pistol, read option and dual threat QBs. But he reiterates points about throwing the ball a lot. I think he's implying TP is lacking in that area as of now. Which I think we can all agree on. That isn't saying Pryor can't or won't improve though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nodisrespect


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 3907
Location: in the present
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, how about when he does address Pryor directly?

Quote:
Q: When we talked to you last time, you said you wanted to see a little bit of Terrelle Pryor in game action and see what you had. What did you see in the time he got, especially that one start in the end?

McKenzie: ďWell, what I did see with Terrelle that I was pleased with, he protected the ball. In the game where you have snapping issues, even with handing off with the ball slipping, protecting when heís being rushed, he protected the ball. That was a plus for me. To see that and to see snap count, the offensive linemen getting used to his cadence. And him getting the plays out and the motions and all the little things he has to do to make sure there were no issues with penalties before the ball is snapped. Now, obviously, you can see the plays when things break down where he can kind of create and do some things. But he had a chance to make some throws and he did pretty good. I was encouraged. Hopefully the new offensive coordinator and find a way to see what he can do best in this off-season and see what he looks like in preseason games.Ē


Which to me means that the ability to work with Pryor is something they are looking for in the new OC. Which means he will be implanted at some point next season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33448
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nodisrespect wrote:
Well, how about when he does address Pryor directly?

Quote:
Q: When we talked to you last time, you said you wanted to see a little bit of Terrelle Pryor in game action and see what you had. What did you see in the time he got, especially that one start in the end?

McKenzie: ďWell, what I did see with Terrelle that I was pleased with, he protected the ball. In the game where you have snapping issues, even with handing off with the ball slipping, protecting when heís being rushed, he protected the ball. That was a plus for me. To see that and to see snap count, the offensive linemen getting used to his cadence. And him getting the plays out and the motions and all the little things he has to do to make sure there were no issues with penalties before the ball is snapped. Now, obviously, you can see the plays when things break down where he can kind of create and do some things. But he had a chance to make some throws and he did pretty good. I was encouraged. Hopefully the new offensive coordinator and find a way to see what he can do best in this off-season and see what he looks like in preseason games.Ē


Which to me means that the ability to work with Pryor is something they are looking for in the new OC. Which means he will be implanted at some point next season.


I read that as more of him saying "I was glad that he didn't look like a complete screw up" than saying "he's a valuable weapon for us". Especially when looking at the other things he seemed to be hinting at, at least. I could be wrong, but that's just the impression I got.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nodisrespect


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 3907
Location: in the present
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
Don't take this as me bashing Pryor, but it really doesn't look to me like RMK is high on him:

Quote:
Q: Obviously running quarterbacks this year have had some success around the league. Do you assess his skills differently seeing that it can work?

McKenzie: Youíve still got to have the total package too. People talk about RG [Robert Griffin III] and [Russell] Wilson and [Colin] Kaepernick. You have to make the short, medium, long throws to be effective. When you play eight or nine in the box and just all off and come get you if you canít complete balls tooÖ


Quote:
Q: From a talent evaluation standpoint, as you see the league, at least some teams gravitating toward more quarterback oriented runs, does that make you evaluate the position any differently going forward?

McKenzie: Youíve got to evaluate. That doesnít mean you change your philosophy and youíre going to go strictly with an option running-type quarterback. Itís always nice to have options. If you can get a guy that can throw it, which all quarterbacks are going to have to be able to throw the football, then on top of that he can run it, thatís the old adage of being a dual threat. Get a defensive end that can play the run and rush the passer, thatís what you want. You got a dual threat with a guy thatís touching the ball every playÖso people are making a big deal out of it. If youíve got a guy that you have to watch out creating a lot of plays when things break down, making something out of nothing, thatís hard to defend.



Quote:
Q: Is that more dangerous to your way of thinking of making things that break down, then the read option plays that everybody is..?

McKenzie: Yeah, because the read option, you can defense that, but that read option and throwing the ball all around the field, itís hard. Thatís hard to defend.


It sounds like he's indirectly saying a lot here, imo. Like he respects the Pistol, read option and dual threat QBs. But he reiterates points about throwing the ball a lot. I think he's implying TP is lacking in that area as of now. Which I think we can all agree on. That isn't saying Pryor can't or won't improve though.
We all know he needs to improve his throwing, but we only got a chance to see one game, and it was raining,Hailing with windy conditions, do you really think he is a 46% type of thrower? I don't. I see him right now as about a 55% type of thrower in normal conditions, drop rate and all.

I think if we could get him up to 60% he would be awesome, which is obviously what everyone wants, but the question is can he produce on a average level right now? And how it would effect his growth as a player, because i don't think allowing him to play has a negative effect on the team, IMO it's all positive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 33448
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nodisrespect wrote:
We all know he needs to improve his throwing, but we only got a chance to see one game, and it was raining,Hailing with windy conditions, do you really think he is a 46% thrower? I don't, see him right now as a bout a 55% type of thrower in normal conditions, drop rate and all.

Honestly, I think the field conditions thing is overblown. You're going to face those kinds of conditions in the NFL again anyway. I think he could be a 46% thrower. I also think he could be a 60% thrower. The only thing I know is that he's still an unknown.

Nodisrespect wrote:
I think if we could get him up to 60% he would be awesome, which is obviously what everyone wants, but the question is can he produce on a average level right now? And how it would effect his growth as a player, because i don't think allowing him to play has a negative effect on the team, IMO it's all positive.


I don't think him playing has a negative effect either, but I do think Palmer would be better for us, at least based off of what I've seen and heard. No idea how much Pryor can produce. Pryor not starting wouldn't harm his progress imo. As a raw prospect, more time to develop could even be something he still needs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCOUGHMAN


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 14911
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
So you're saying Pryor is on the same level as Newton, RG3, Kaep and Wilson? Sorry but I don't believe that. Give him the #2 spot sure, but he has to earn the right to compete for the #1 spot.


You're right about all this but the big thing is he earned the right to COMPETE. That is a solid point that people need to learn.


cp didnt have to compete he was brought in and handed the job just like

rolo, breisel, willie etc etc
_________________


green24 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN > all of you


Raider X wrote:
This is football, not pussology 101
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, 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 9 of 13

 
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