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

Do you like Reggie's BPA approach?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5360
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
.

I honestly can't believe that Reggie thought Stacey McGee, Sio Moore, Brice Butler and Nick Kasa were the absolute 'Best Player Available' where they were taken, they seem to me to be taken on potential and need with a smaller consideration to actual ability in the here and now.


+1 He has got to take other factors into consideration, because there is no way anybody would rate Brice Butler ahead of Da'Rick Rogers as a prospect.


BPA should really mean best prospect available because that's how teams set their board. They're not looking at how the guys played, they're looking at how likely they are to play in this league. And low life scumbags like Rogers are very likely to be quickly out of the league that's why they get downgraded.


He failed some drug tets. While it is very stupid, it hardly makes him a lowlife scumbag. There are plenty of players in the NFL who ran into similar, or worse, trouble either in college or early in their pro career and went on to stay out of trouble. IMO, Da'Rick Rogers was a better all-around "prospect" than Brice Butler. He had some drug issues but Butler has far less talent, played lower competition, and had barely any production throughout his career. I don't see him as a safer prospect at all.
_________________


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
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5754
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He may be a better football prospect, while not taking into account the person. But what you think and feel has no effect on the criteria by which they set their draft board. And apparently that criteria includes some off field considerations. And it does apparently for alot of teams, or Da'rick Rogers wouldn't have been there in the 6th for anyone to draft.

Really though, that's where the argument falls apart. 32 teams all agreed this idiot wasn't worth drafting. One fan stands alone saying they're wrong. Which entity is irrational right now?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCOUGHMAN


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 14746
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
Alex smith and j Campbell went through the same thing, they're still in the league. Quit your excuses for the guy, it's disgusting. Your bias is showing...


no comparison imo 49'rs and Redskins were better run organizations.


Did you just say the Redskins are a well run organization? WTF.....


lol can you read? wtf


I'm gonna take that as a "yes". Just go on and continue making up excuses for Russell. At least you're funny when you do that


smh. You really need to practice your reading comprehension skills.
_________________


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
Totty


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 9401
Location: Moundsville W.V.
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
Alex smith and j Campbell went through the same thing, they're still in the league. Quit your excuses for the guy, it's disgusting. Your bias is showing...


no comparison imo 49'rs and Redskins were better run organizations.


Did you just say the Redskins are a well run organization? WTF.....


lol can you read? wtf


I'm gonna take that as a "yes". Just go on and continue making up excuses for Russell. At least you're funny when you do that


smh. You really need to practice your reading comprehension skills.


You two girls need to hug it out.
_________________


First Steve Jobs, Now Al Davis.. God must be building something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 32526
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Totty wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
Alex smith and j Campbell went through the same thing, they're still in the league. Quit your excuses for the guy, it's disgusting. Your bias is showing...


no comparison imo 49'rs and Redskins were better run organizations.


Did you just say the Redskins are a well run organization? WTF.....


lol can you read? wtf


I'm gonna take that as a "yes". Just go on and continue making up excuses for Russell. At least you're funny when you do that


smh. You really need to practice your reading comprehension skills.


You two girls need to hug it out.

ARI GOLD LAYIN DOWN THE LAW!!!
_________________

BigBillsFan13 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Somewhere, RR strokes his mustache with pride
Among other things...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5360
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
He may be a better football prospect, while not taking into account the person. But what you think and feel has no effect on the criteria by which they set their draft board. And apparently that criteria includes some off field considerations. And it does apparently for alot of teams, or Da'rick Rogers wouldn't have been there in the 6th for anyone to draft.

Really though, that's where the argument falls apart. 32 teams all agreed this idiot wasn't worth drafting. One fan stands alone saying they're wrong. Which entity is irrational right now?


I stand alone and say 32 teams are wrong? No, I just said I would have taken him over Butler in the 7th. Butler is just as likely to be cut for being a nobody 7th round pick who doesnt impress in camp as Rogers is for testing positive again.

One of those guys fell in the draft because of some bad choices, the other one fell because he isn't very good. Its more likely for Rogers to clean up his act than it is for Butler to be a starting-caliber WR.

FWIW, Rogers was just an example. I was talking about Reggie taking someone like Butler, a H/S/W guy with poor hands, over Buchanon, Poyer, Dawkins, Otten, Wort, Geathers, or any other player who was a better prospect and still filled a need. I still liked our draft and dont hold this one pick against him, but to me it just shows that he either does not stick to BPA, or he has a weird way of rating them.
_________________


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
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5754
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 12:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
holyghost wrote:
He may be a better football prospect, while not taking into account the person. But what you think and feel has no effect on the criteria by which they set their draft board. And apparently that criteria includes some off field considerations. And it does apparently for alot of teams, or Da'rick Rogers wouldn't have been there in the 6th for anyone to draft.

Really though, that's where the argument falls apart. 32 teams all agreed this idiot wasn't worth drafting. One fan stands alone saying they're wrong. Which entity is irrational right now?


I stand alone and say 32 teams are wrong? No, I just said I would have taken him over Butler in the 7th. Butler is just as likely to be cut for being a nobody 7th round pick who doesnt impress in camp as Rogers is for testing positive again.

One of those guys fell in the draft because of some bad choices, the other one fell because he isn't very good. Its more likely for Rogers to clean up his act than it is for Butler to be a starting-caliber WR.

FWIW, Rogers was just an example. I was talking about Reggie taking someone like Butler, a H/S/W guy with poor hands, over Buchanon, Poyer, Dawkins, Otten, Wort, Geathers, or any other player who was a better prospect and still filled a need. I still liked our draft and dont hold this one pick against him, but to me it just shows that he either does not stick to BPA, or he has a weird way of rating them.


I hear what you're saying, because ultimately both Butler and Rogers are really at the bottom of the draft.
But I think it's the latter where they or he have a weird way of rating. Maybe not so much weird, but more like complex or particular to the work these guys do. I won't pretend I know how they scout, and what multiple details go into compiling a board. Or what they really look for when watching them or interviewing. But I have the suspicion it's much different than fan or media concepts of it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCOUGHMAN


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 14746
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Totty wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
Alex smith and j Campbell went through the same thing, they're still in the league. Quit your excuses for the guy, it's disgusting. Your bias is showing...


no comparison imo 49'rs and Redskins were better run organizations.


Did you just say the Redskins are a well run organization? WTF.....


lol can you read? wtf


I'm gonna take that as a "yes". Just go on and continue making up excuses for Russell. At least you're funny when you do that


smh. You really need to practice your reading comprehension skills.


You two girls need to hug it out.


thanks oprah
_________________


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
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5645
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 11:04 am    Post subject: Re: Do you like Reggie's BPA approach? Reply with quote

RaidersAreOne wrote:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000166587/article/oakland-raiders-upgrade-roster-by-ignoring-need-building-depth

Quote:
Why not? There are only so many draft picks. And plus, just like McKenzie learned while working his way up the front-office ladder in Green Bay, it's about nabbing the best available player. Otherwise, you are reaching.

"You try to go with the best guys and then you address other areas with whatever else comes available this summer, training camp or at the cut-downs," McKenzie said. "You don't stop trying to upgrade your roster."


Key example is us desperately needing a DT, and we waited until late in the draft to get one. I personally love to BPA approach, and believe the better teams in the NFL incorporate this tactic. Do you guys like the BPA approach, or do you prefer satisfying your teams most urgent needs, even if you have to slightly reach?


I'm not a fan of being a purist so I am not a fan of a true BPA without conditions. BPA isn't the real issue as much as how the Raiders weighted their Big Board. If the Raiders were seriously considering Hayden at #3 overall then that's a WOW!
_________________
Raiders 2014 Draft (check out my draft review tell me what you think)
Mancrush 2014: DE Clowney, WR Watkins, OT Robinson, LB Shazier, FS Brooks, TE ASJ, OG Jackson, WR Janis, OT Lucas, OT Tiny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14117
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
.

I honestly can't believe that Reggie thought Stacey McGee, Sio Moore, Brice Butler and Nick Kasa were the absolute 'Best Player Available' where they were taken, they seem to me to be taken on potential and need with a smaller consideration to actual ability in the here and now.


+1 He has got to take other factors into consideration, because there is no way anybody would rate Brice Butler ahead of Da'Rick Rogers as a prospect.


BPA should really mean best prospect available because that's how teams set their board. They're not looking at how the guys played, they're looking at how likely they are to play in this league. And low life scumbags like Rogers are very likely to be quickly out of the league that's why they get downgraded.


He failed some drug tets. While it is very stupid, it hardly makes him a lowlife scumbag. There are plenty of players in the NFL who ran into similar, or worse, trouble either in college or early in their pro career and went on to stay out of trouble. IMO, Da'Rick Rogers was a better all-around "prospect" than Brice Butler. He had some drug issues but Butler has far less talent, played lower competition, and had barely any production throughout his career. I don't see him as a safer prospect at all.


The drug tests were just the tip of the iceberg. I wouldn't call him a scumbag for smoking pot. And teams wouldn't have passed on him throughout the draft just for that either. You can have all the talent in the world and it won't matter if you're suspended or in jail. The risk was too high for any team to spend a draft pick on that guy.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 32526
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
.

I honestly can't believe that Reggie thought Stacey McGee, Sio Moore, Brice Butler and Nick Kasa were the absolute 'Best Player Available' where they were taken, they seem to me to be taken on potential and need with a smaller consideration to actual ability in the here and now.


+1 He has got to take other factors into consideration, because there is no way anybody would rate Brice Butler ahead of Da'Rick Rogers as a prospect.


BPA should really mean best prospect available because that's how teams set their board. They're not looking at how the guys played, they're looking at how likely they are to play in this league. And low life scumbags like Rogers are very likely to be quickly out of the league that's why they get downgraded.


He failed some drug tets. While it is very stupid, it hardly makes him a lowlife scumbag. There are plenty of players in the NFL who ran into similar, or worse, trouble either in college or early in their pro career and went on to stay out of trouble. IMO, Da'Rick Rogers was a better all-around "prospect" than Brice Butler. He had some drug issues but Butler has far less talent, played lower competition, and had barely any production throughout his career. I don't see him as a safer prospect at all.


The drug tests were just the tip of the iceberg. I wouldn't call him a scumbag for smoking pot. And teams wouldn't have passed on him throughout the draft just for that either. You can have all the talent in the world and it won't matter if you're suspended or in jail. The risk was too high for any team to spend a draft pick on that guy.


Don't think I missed what you did there Wink

Haha. Seriously though, I'm with oakdb on this one. While stoners aren't all scumbags, the fact remains that players like that come with a lot of risk. That and Rogers had personality problems as well. I wouldn't want him in our locker room. If we had Ray Lewis or Peyton Manning or someone like that to keep him straight then maybe. But the fact that he went undrafted is really telling.
_________________

BigBillsFan13 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Somewhere, RR strokes his mustache with pride
Among other things...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5360
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
.

I honestly can't believe that Reggie thought Stacey McGee, Sio Moore, Brice Butler and Nick Kasa were the absolute 'Best Player Available' where they were taken, they seem to me to be taken on potential and need with a smaller consideration to actual ability in the here and now.


+1 He has got to take other factors into consideration, because there is no way anybody would rate Brice Butler ahead of Da'Rick Rogers as a prospect.


BPA should really mean best prospect available because that's how teams set their board. They're not looking at how the guys played, they're looking at how likely they are to play in this league. And low life scumbags like Rogers are very likely to be quickly out of the league that's why they get downgraded.


He failed some drug tets. While it is very stupid, it hardly makes him a lowlife scumbag. There are plenty of players in the NFL who ran into similar, or worse, trouble either in college or early in their pro career and went on to stay out of trouble. IMO, Da'Rick Rogers was a better all-around "prospect" than Brice Butler. He had some drug issues but Butler has far less talent, played lower competition, and had barely any production throughout his career. I don't see him as a safer prospect at all.


The drug tests were just the tip of the iceberg. I wouldn't call him a scumbag for smoking pot. And teams wouldn't have passed on him throughout the draft just for that either. You can have all the talent in the world and it won't matter if you're suspended or in jail. The risk was too high for any team to spend a draft pick on that guy.


So dont take a guy in the 7th round that may be off the roster at some point? You have to remember this is a 7th round pick, not a 3rd or 4th. How many 7th rounders make the 53 man roster? Of the ones that do, how many make it more than a season or two in the league? How many ever start or make any impact at all? How many of our more recent 6th and 7th round picks lasted more than one season? Stryker Sulak, Jon Holland, Nate Stupar, Kevin McMahan, Ryan Riddle, Jeremy Ware... all of them were gone by the end of their first year or sooner.

The fact of the matter is that any 7th round pick is a candidate to not make a roster. IMO, there is a better chance Butler cuts cut from Oakland for not being good enough before Rogers does from Buffalo for getting into a hypothetical situation that may not ever happen. The odds of Butler being cut for not being very good are just as likely, if not more, than Rogers being cut for testing positive again. Most 7th rounders fail to make an impact and are usually cut anyway. If you are choosing between two, why not take the more talented one?

EDIT: I am not a Rogers fanboy or anything, but the 7th round is where teams can afford to take risks. Butler is not somebody that will be important to this team, he is a poor man's DHB- no hands, no college production, etc. I dont see what harm it does taking a much more talented player over him. If Rogers gets in trouble, he gets cut, its not like we missed out on someone special had we passed on Butler. Thats all I'm saying.
_________________


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
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14117
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ZoomWaffle wrote:
If you are choosing between two, why not take the more talented one?


Because the most talented one as a serious character issue that goes well beyond failing a drug test.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
G


Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 3300
Location: Hollywierd
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCOUGHMAN wrote:
DarthDavis wrote:
NCOUGHMAN wrote:
DarthDavis wrote:


Don't forget his infliction of lethargy. Poor giant #2.


thats what the drank does


Drank doesn't lethargize people, People lethargize people.


No really thats what the drank does. Ive seen it make even the biggest dude go to sleep like a old school wwf sleeper hold.

RIP Dj Screw


Sounds like a supplement I use to take before it became scheduled. Renewtrient made you feel GREAT, but too much and ZZZZZZZ,zzzzzzzz
Only thing POTUS Clinton did to really [inappropriate/removed] me off. Cured migraines, cut body fat while keeping muscle mass, made me a happy nice person. Laughing

PS I like how Reggie handles business. If he doesn't hit on his Draft picks and FA's then he'll be replaced in 5 years BUT.....He will have changed the overpaying, underperforming culture that has stunk us for quite some time. Our future is bright, we just have to battle thru the here and now. Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5360
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
ZoomWaffle wrote:
If you are choosing between two, why not take the more talented one?


Because the most talented one as a serious character issue that goes well beyond failing a drug test.


Right, and I agree with you about Rogers as a person. You are just missing my point. I think Rogers is dumb for what he did, I think he needs to be put in his place for acting like a diva, and I really don't know if these things will follow him into the NFL. It is a risk for sure, but so is banking on Butler to ever become anything at all. In my eyes, Rogers and Butler have equal odds of being cut- one has a bad attitude and the other is just a bad WR. IMO Rogers has a better chance of staying out of trouble than Butler has of ever being close to a starting WR, and that is a risk I would take in the 7th round for a team seriously deprived of talent because cutting a 7th rounder that doesnt get straight is no different from cutting a 7th rounder that just never panned out.
_________________


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
Display posts from previous:   

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

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




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group