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

McKenzie's job so far, is he doing the right thing?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3813
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
raiders006 wrote:
I understand its highly unlikely that Reggie is fired but some of you seem content with giving him a 3 year pass. IMO the pressure is on right now for him to nail this draft; seems like some people in here are content with not demanding greatness from the GM.


So in your world he needs to nail this draft how? What's your defination of 'nail this draft?'

Mind you the Raiders have 1 pick in the first 65 picks so most of the talent will will be somewhat raw/developmental.

It takes minimum 3 years to gauge a draft class. So you'll excuse 'some people' for not having an unrealistic demand of greatness.

It takes a minimum 3 years to let a GM settle in, build the roster in his image and see what his draft picks yield. I'll give Reggie 5 years because the first 2 he wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.


Good Post BP!

I think most people (including myself) thought the 2010 draft was a great one for Oakland, in reality we drafted 0 Pro Bowlers and 2 relatively high profile busts (McClain and Campbell). Houston and Veldheer are good players and Ford has potential but immediately after the draft we were praised from virtually every angle, it has been underwhelming so far as such. Immediately after the draft we may have graded out as an A- or a B+ maybe?? With hindsight, we couldn't be more than a C+ with only 3 players still on the team after only 3 full seasons.

Obviously, we all want McKenzie to have a hugely successful draft but just picking well known, high profile, hyped up players is not necessarily the way. The real test of this draft will be in how many of the drafted players are worth resigning once their rookie contracts are up or even still on the roster.


I think it's more important on how the GM works the draft rather than the players he picks. There's always going to be busts in the draft but does get good value and how he trades up or down are the important things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22834
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
raiders006 wrote:
I understand its highly unlikely that Reggie is fired but some of you seem content with giving him a 3 year pass. IMO the pressure is on right now for him to nail this draft; seems like some people in here are content with not demanding greatness from the GM.


So in your world he needs to nail this draft how? What's your defination of 'nail this draft?'

Mind you the Raiders have 1 pick in the first 65 picks so most of the talent will will be somewhat raw/developmental.

It takes minimum 3 years to gauge a draft class. So you'll excuse 'some people' for not having an unrealistic demand of greatness.

It takes a minimum 3 years to let a GM settle in, build the roster in his image and see what his draft picks yield. I'll give Reggie 5 years because the first 2 he wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.


Good Post BP!

I think most people (including myself) thought the 2010 draft was a great one for Oakland, in reality we drafted 0 Pro Bowlers and 2 relatively high profile busts (McClain and Campbell). Houston and Veldheer are good players and Ford has potential but immediately after the draft we were praised from virtually every angle, it has been underwhelming so far as such. Immediately after the draft we may have graded out as an A- or a B+ maybe?? With hindsight, we couldn't be more than a C+ with only 3 players still on the team after only 3 full seasons.

Obviously, we all want McKenzie to have a hugely successful draft but just picking well known, high profile, hyped up players is not necessarily the way. The real test of this draft will be in how many of the drafted players are worth resigning once their rookie contracts are up or even still on the roster.


I think it's more important on how the GM works the draft rather than the players he picks. There's always going to be busts in the draft but does get good value and how he trades up or down are the important things.


Trading around in the draft is irrelevant unless the player selected pans out. We've seen a lot of GMs lose jobs over how they worked the draft.

It's ALL about the player that is picked in the end and what he becomes on your team.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3813
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
bitty wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
raiders006 wrote:
I understand its highly unlikely that Reggie is fired but some of you seem content with giving him a 3 year pass. IMO the pressure is on right now for him to nail this draft; seems like some people in here are content with not demanding greatness from the GM.


So in your world he needs to nail this draft how? What's your defination of 'nail this draft?'

Mind you the Raiders have 1 pick in the first 65 picks so most of the talent will will be somewhat raw/developmental.

It takes minimum 3 years to gauge a draft class. So you'll excuse 'some people' for not having an unrealistic demand of greatness.

It takes a minimum 3 years to let a GM settle in, build the roster in his image and see what his draft picks yield. I'll give Reggie 5 years because the first 2 he wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.


Good Post BP!

I think most people (including myself) thought the 2010 draft was a great one for Oakland, in reality we drafted 0 Pro Bowlers and 2 relatively high profile busts (McClain and Campbell). Houston and Veldheer are good players and Ford has potential but immediately after the draft we were praised from virtually every angle, it has been underwhelming so far as such. Immediately after the draft we may have graded out as an A- or a B+ maybe?? With hindsight, we couldn't be more than a C+ with only 3 players still on the team after only 3 full seasons.

Obviously, we all want McKenzie to have a hugely successful draft but just picking well known, high profile, hyped up players is not necessarily the way. The real test of this draft will be in how many of the drafted players are worth resigning once their rookie contracts are up or even still on the roster.


I think it's more important on how the GM works the draft rather than the players he picks. There's always going to be busts in the draft but does get good value and how he trades up or down are the important things.


Trading around in the draft is irrelevant unless the player selected pans out. We've seen a lot of GMs lose jobs over how they worked the draft.

It's ALL about the player that is picked in the end and what he becomes on your team.


I don't agree
Belichick is a master at the draft and he has plenty of players that don't fulfill their draft status.
There's a difference between the scouting department and how the GM handles the draft.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NickButera


Moderator
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Posts: 6539
Location: Nevada
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bitty wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
bitty wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
raiders006 wrote:
I understand its highly unlikely that Reggie is fired but some of you seem content with giving him a 3 year pass. IMO the pressure is on right now for him to nail this draft; seems like some people in here are content with not demanding greatness from the GM.


So in your world he needs to nail this draft how? What's your defination of 'nail this draft?'

Mind you the Raiders have 1 pick in the first 65 picks so most of the talent will will be somewhat raw/developmental.

It takes minimum 3 years to gauge a draft class. So you'll excuse 'some people' for not having an unrealistic demand of greatness.

It takes a minimum 3 years to let a GM settle in, build the roster in his image and see what his draft picks yield. I'll give Reggie 5 years because the first 2 he wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.


Good Post BP!

I think most people (including myself) thought the 2010 draft was a great one for Oakland, in reality we drafted 0 Pro Bowlers and 2 relatively high profile busts (McClain and Campbell). Houston and Veldheer are good players and Ford has potential but immediately after the draft we were praised from virtually every angle, it has been underwhelming so far as such. Immediately after the draft we may have graded out as an A- or a B+ maybe?? With hindsight, we couldn't be more than a C+ with only 3 players still on the team after only 3 full seasons.

Obviously, we all want McKenzie to have a hugely successful draft but just picking well known, high profile, hyped up players is not necessarily the way. The real test of this draft will be in how many of the drafted players are worth resigning once their rookie contracts are up or even still on the roster.


I think it's more important on how the GM works the draft rather than the players he picks. There's always going to be busts in the draft but does get good value and how he trades up or down are the important things.


Trading around in the draft is irrelevant unless the player selected pans out. We've seen a lot of GMs lose jobs over how they worked the draft.

It's ALL about the player that is picked in the end and what he becomes on your team.


I don't agree
Belichick is a master at the draft and he has plenty of players that don't fulfill their draft status.
There's a difference between the scouting department and how the GM handles the draft.


I've been going back and forth on this, but when you say it's all about how he works in in order to get good value..... isn't value determined by your draft board, which is determined by your scouting dept and GM's scouting ability? If that's the case than no mater how you manage a draft it still comes down to your scouting regardless. Value in a draft is subjective, different for every team. Each year you get at least 7 picks, which is more then enough if your scouting dept is good enough.

Now, if you're a poor draft day manager in that you're constantly trading away your picks, then yes, it is be more important than scouting IMO. But if your team generally keeps most of their picks then scouting would be more important it would seem to me.
_________________
Bah-Weep-Granah-Weep-Nini-Bong

My short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Also, my short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dessie


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 4854
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NickButera wrote:
bitty wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
bitty wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
raiders006 wrote:
I understand its highly unlikely that Reggie is fired but some of you seem content with giving him a 3 year pass. IMO the pressure is on right now for him to nail this draft; seems like some people in here are content with not demanding greatness from the GM.


So in your world he needs to nail this draft how? What's your defination of 'nail this draft?'

Mind you the Raiders have 1 pick in the first 65 picks so most of the talent will will be somewhat raw/developmental.

It takes minimum 3 years to gauge a draft class. So you'll excuse 'some people' for not having an unrealistic demand of greatness.

It takes a minimum 3 years to let a GM settle in, build the roster in his image and see what his draft picks yield. I'll give Reggie 5 years because the first 2 he wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.


Good Post BP!

I think most people (including myself) thought the 2010 draft was a great one for Oakland, in reality we drafted 0 Pro Bowlers and 2 relatively high profile busts (McClain and Campbell). Houston and Veldheer are good players and Ford has potential but immediately after the draft we were praised from virtually every angle, it has been underwhelming so far as such. Immediately after the draft we may have graded out as an A- or a B+ maybe?? With hindsight, we couldn't be more than a C+ with only 3 players still on the team after only 3 full seasons.

Obviously, we all want McKenzie to have a hugely successful draft but just picking well known, high profile, hyped up players is not necessarily the way. The real test of this draft will be in how many of the drafted players are worth resigning once their rookie contracts are up or even still on the roster.


I think it's more important on how the GM works the draft rather than the players he picks. There's always going to be busts in the draft but does get good value and how he trades up or down are the important things.


Trading around in the draft is irrelevant unless the player selected pans out. We've seen a lot of GMs lose jobs over how they worked the draft.

It's ALL about the player that is picked in the end and what he becomes on your team.


I don't agree
Belichick is a master at the draft and he has plenty of players that don't fulfill their draft status.
There's a difference between the scouting department and how the GM handles the draft.


I've been going back and forth on this, but when you say it's all about how he works in in order to get good value..... isn't value determined by your draft board, which is determined by your scouting dept and GM's scouting ability? If that's the case than no mater how you manage a draft it still comes down to your scouting regardless. Value in a draft is subjective, different for every team. Each year you get at least 7 picks, which is more then enough if your scouting dept is good enough.

Now, if you're a poor draft day manager in that you're constantly trading away your picks, then yes, it is be more important than scouting IMO. But if your team generally keeps most of their picks then scouting would be more important it would seem to me.


The fact that bitty thinks the Packer suck at drafting tells you he shouldn't be taken too seriously.
_________________
bitty wrote:
I don't understand why everybody thinks Green Bay is the pinnacle of NFL franchises?
In my opinion they are a joke. In the last ten years there drafts sucked.
#clueless
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22834
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dessie wrote:

The fact that bitty thinks the Packer suck at drafting tells you he shouldn't be taken too seriously.


Good point. bitty how did you possibly make that statement? I'd like to hear some backup to that claim.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DOCLEW 28


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 10902
Location: East Oakland
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.
_________________

Raider X hooked me with the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
macklemore


Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 1425
Location: Seattle, WA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DOCLEW 28 wrote:
ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.


it's also funny that GB is considered the model franchise when their drafts suck. if they didn't luck into the GOAT with the 24th pick in the draft they would be bottom feeders.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raiderfan19


Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 3017
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

macklemore wrote:
DOCLEW 28 wrote:
ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.


it's also funny that GB is considered the model franchise when their drafts suck.if they didn't luck into the GOAT with the 24th pick in the draft they would be bottom feeders.

Matthews, Raji, Casey Heyward, Burnett, Worthy, Nick Perry, Shields, AJ Hawk, Newhouse, Bulaga, Sitton, Cobb, Jordy Nelson.... All draft picks, all day 1 starters for us.... How's their drafting suck?
_________________

S\O Palooka on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
macklemore


Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 1425
Location: Seattle, WA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

raiderfan19 wrote:
macklemore wrote:
DOCLEW 28 wrote:
ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.


it's also funny that GB is considered the model franchise when their drafts suck.if they didn't luck into the GOAT with the 24th pick in the draft they would be bottom feeders.

Matthews, Raji, Casey Heyward, Burnett, Worthy, Nick Perry, Shields, AJ Hawk, Newhouse, Bulaga, Sitton, Cobb, Jordy Nelson.... All draft picks, all day 1 starters for us.... How's their drafting suck?


because people act like they have the most talented team in the nfl and their philosophy of never spending money in FA is a good thing.

most of those players you listed are average starters. you could make a list of almost any teams drafts and say they are day 1 starters for us, that's how talented we are.

you take Aaron Rodgers away from the packers replace him with Flynn and the packers are at their very best a 7-9 team.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3397
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

macklemore wrote:
raiderfan19 wrote:
macklemore wrote:
DOCLEW 28 wrote:
ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.


it's also funny that GB is considered the model franchise when their drafts suck.if they didn't luck into the GOAT with the 24th pick in the draft they would be bottom feeders.

Matthews, Raji, Casey Heyward, Burnett, Worthy, Nick Perry, Shields, AJ Hawk, Newhouse, Bulaga, Sitton, Cobb, Jordy Nelson.... All draft picks, all day 1 starters for us.... How's their drafting suck?


because people act like they have the most talented team in the nfl and their philosophy of never spending money in FA is a good thing.

most of those players you listed are average starters. you could make a list of almost any teams drafts and say they are day 1 starters for us, that's how talented we are.

you take Aaron Rodgers away from the packers replace him with Flynn and the packers are at their very best a 7-9 team.


Same could be said of any team with the exception of the Niners and Seahawks. Both of which built their teams through the draft. Heck you could even say they got lucky because both of their starting QBs where not drafted in the first.

Truth is their philosophy, which it looks like most of the good teams in the NFL uses, works.
_________________


On the Raider's Staff
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Its like they're too incompetent to know they're incompetent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reggiesucks


Joined: 16 Sep 2012
Posts: 37
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

macklemore wrote:
raiderfan19 wrote:
macklemore wrote:
DOCLEW 28 wrote:
ITs funny that Bellicheck is regarded as a master of working the draft and moving picks. But his roster shows none of those benefits. He continually signs free agents and tries to plug and play the.

Hopefully Reggie will fill the roster with quality players no matter the round.


it's also funny that GB is considered the model franchise when their drafts suck.if they didn't luck into the GOAT with the 24th pick in the draft they would be bottom feeders.

Matthews, Raji, Casey Heyward, Burnett, Worthy, Nick Perry, Shields, AJ Hawk, Newhouse, Bulaga, Sitton, Cobb, Jordy Nelson.... All draft picks, all day 1 starters for us.... How's their drafting suck?


because people act like they have the most talented team in the nfl and their philosophy of never spending money in FA is a good thing.

most of those players you listed are average starters. you could make a list of almost any teams drafts and say they are day 1 starters for us, that's how talented we are.

you take Aaron Rodgers away from the packers replace him with Flynn and the packers are at their very best a 7-9 team.


I made that exact same point on a post last season. The Packers roster is average. Their Defense is horrible. You take Aaron Rodgers off that team and they are average. Everyone talks about our team but the biggest problem for our team (and most others) has always been QB. When we have a good one (aka Rich Gannon) we are good. When we don't (aka Jabusto) we suck!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22834
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Name a team that spent big in FA and had it pay off?

I have to laugh at the Packers comments. When Flynn tore up Detroit/NE it was because of the talent around him. But without Rodgers, the Pack are a bottom feeder? Please explain that to me.

This is a QB league. You have a great one, you are a consistent winner. But that does not take away from the talent on the team.

The Pack draft well, pay their star players and build in the draft. They find bargain FAs. The Giants and Ravens operate in the same manor. Seems to be working there as well.

Buying FA's never works. 1 impact player can help a team. But Miami this season, won't win a Superbowl with all that talent they bought and their GM will be fired this offseason.

Washington, Oakland and Philly have all tried to 'reload' and cap strap their teams. Did nothing for their franchises.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 01 Mar 2006
Posts: 14483
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Whos-been-doing-the-best-job-of-drafting.html

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Studying-the-draft-record-of-NFL-Teams.html
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Reggiesucks


Joined: 16 Sep 2012
Posts: 37
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Name a team that spent big in FA and had it pay off?

I have to laugh at the Packers comments. When Flynn tore up Detroit/NE it was because of the talent around him. But without Rodgers, the Pack are a bottom feeder? Please explain that to me.

This is a QB league. You have a great one, you are a consistent winner. But that does not take away from the talent on the team.

The Pack draft well, pay their star players and build in the draft. They find bargain FAs. The Giants and Ravens operate in the same manor. Seems to be working there as well.

Buying FA's never works. 1 impact player can help a team. But Miami this season, won't win a Superbowl with all that talent they bought and their GM will be fired this offseason.

Washington, Oakland and Philly have all tried to 'reload' and cap strap their teams. Did nothing for their franchises.


Matt Flynn had 2 good games. That's what it was, nothing more nothing less. I don't know how much is attributed to the talent around him and how much was him. I guess we will see this season. I supspect it was some of both plus the fact that Det and NE play terrible D.

Bottom feeders were your words. Middle of the pack was the words used by me and the guy I agreed with. The Packs D is terrible and has been for a while. The also have zero running game. They also have the best QB in the league which mask their flaws.

There is no 1 was to get players. Ozzie Newsome has stated this many times. Draft, FA, Trade, Waiver Wire, However... Get them however you can at your price. It's not magic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
Page 28 of 37

 
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