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

Freeman Watch
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  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
Franky Rey


Joined: 17 Aug 2013
Posts: 39
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would hate to sign Freeman at this point.

Just let Pryor play the season to see what he's got.

He's not going to play great every game so I'd hate for the coaches to throw Freeman in if Pryor has a stretch of bad play.

I can't really see Freeman having that much to offer anyways.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22613
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

91jmay wrote:
Or you know, if in a few weeks time (after bye) Pryor struggles we put Freeman in and see what he can do.

Was that really hard to work out?


This.

You can never have enough QBs when you don't have a franchise one. Freeman adds better depth, competition and a possible starter going into next season.

If people are 'concerned' taking the job from Pryor, you are not that confident in Pryor clearly.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22613
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Franky Rey wrote:
I would hate to sign Freeman at this point.

Just let Pryor play the season to see what he's got.

He's not going to play great every game so I'd hate for the coaches to throw Freeman in if Pryor has a stretch of bad play.

I can't really see Freeman having that much to offer anyways.


I don't get this logic. So don't have a solid backup plan if Pryor falters? Or what if he takes another hit running and can't go.

Trusting an URFA QB to fill in just because is misguided.

A 24 year old QB w/ starting experience is nothing but a help to a team w/ limited options at the position. If Pryor bust out, you now have trade bait. If not, you have an option at QB.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5772
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My concern is not that he would take the job from Pryor. More that it would be handed to him, #1. #2 concern is signing a guy based on the advice of another coach. Bergstrom worked out well, then grab Freeman based on Olson? Not liking that. Can Allen and McKenzie run this team or not?

I have bought into the idea of competition winning the job, and Pryor did that. Insert Freeman as starter and that becomes a load of crap. Also, at some point you have to take the ups and downs with a young QB and give him enough time to progress. I think it's safe to say 4 games started isn't giving Pryor a fair shot to progress.

Honestly, if Allen and McKenzie do in fact get Freeman and magically insert him as starter, I'm ready for their imminent firing. I'm all for giving it time but have seen some clear concerns emerge with them. Not immense concerns, but not to be overlooked either. In my mind they have all year, and McKenzie should be guaranteed next year too. But if they do that move - inserting Freeman, who by the way has proven nothing in particular in this league, is not at all a slam dunk franchise addition, and cannot be seen as any more than a lateral or backward move for this team right now at this point (taking into consideration the severe lack of overall help for any QB in this offense, and taking into consideration walking off the street into a starting role as being a virtual guarantee of immediate failures due to lack of knowledge of said offense and chemistry with surrounding players) - then I am over the edge into "glad when they are fired" territory.

I also must say I do not care for the way they have been throwing money and picks at the QB position like they are making it rain at a club. It smacks of not knowing the right thing to do, so desperately doing anything they can think of.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darkness


Joined: 24 Jun 2012
Posts: 7771
Location: CA
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ch8878 wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Freeman was surrounded with a great team in TB and sucked. How's he supposed to play better here?


Have you seen TB play LOL? They suck with or with out him.


I have. QB was and still is their biggest weakness. You really expect Mike Glennon to play well as a rookie? Bucs have a way better supporting cast across the board. Not to mention he actually trained with the Bucs during the off-season. Stupid signing if he's expected to start for us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Professor Oak


Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 3843
Location: Pallet Town
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yet another lateral move at the QB position if this happens...
_________________
(o◕ ‿‿◕o)//
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22613
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Professor Oak wrote:
Yet another lateral move at the QB position if this happens...


Some of you are acting like Freeman would be the starting QB going forward. Lateral move, maybe. Better depth, absolutely!

Freeman is better than McGloin and Flynn. That is what matters. Can he be better than Pryor, possibly. Will this prevent the FO from looking at QBs in the draft..... doubtful.

And for those bringing up the Olson connection, it's obvious. But don't be so pedantic to think that Allen and McKenzie haven't watched him play and know what he may be able to bring. The fact Olson has worked w/ him in the past is a bonus.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BlackPrestige92


Joined: 08 Nov 2011
Posts: 6187
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Professor Oak wrote:
Yet another lateral move at the QB position if this happens...


Some of you are acting like Freeman would be the starting QB going forward. Lateral move, maybe. Better depth, absolutely!

Freeman is better than McGloin and Flynn. That is what matters. Can he be better than Pryor, possibly. Will this prevent the FO from looking at QBs in the draft..... doubtful.

And for those bringing up the Olson connection, it's obvious. But don't be so pedantic to think that Allen and McKenzie haven't watched him play and know what he may be able to bring. The fact Olson has worked w/ him in the past is a bonus.

Just like they watched Flynn play & knew what he could bring to the table......the fact that McKenzie saw him in GB was a bonus.


Am I doing it right?
_________________


的f Phil Jackson came back, still no coaching me, I知 uncoachable, I知 unsociable.
-Kendrick Lamar
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Franky Rey


Joined: 17 Aug 2013
Posts: 39
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Franky Rey wrote:
I would hate to sign Freeman at this point.

Just let Pryor play the season to see what he's got.

He's not going to play great every game so I'd hate for the coaches to throw Freeman in if Pryor has a stretch of bad play.

I can't really see Freeman having that much to offer anyways.


I don't get this logic. So don't have a solid backup plan if Pryor falters? Or what if he takes another hit running and can't go.

Trusting an URFA QB to fill in just because is misguided.

A 24 year old QB w/ starting experience is nothing but a help to a team w/ limited options at the position. If Pryor bust out, you now have trade bait. If not, you have an option at QB.
I'd just reiterate what holyghost said in that I'm not afraid he would outperform Pryor but I'd be afraid that he'll be handed the starting position just because he's more "traditional" and seems to fit in better with Olsen's scheme.

About Pryor faltering, I say let him. He's a young QB who is going to make mistakes. If we sign Freeman, I have a feeling the coaches are going to be trigger happy in putting him.

Just let Pryor play the season. Barring a season ending injury the next few weeks, I would stay away from Freeman at least until the offseason.

It's not like we're contending for a playoff spot or anything anyways. This season has almost always been the closest thing to a wash as you can get.

Pryor has been one of the lone sparks in a mostly dismal offense so far. Don't ruin it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22613
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BlackPrestige92 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Professor Oak wrote:
Yet another lateral move at the QB position if this happens...


Some of you are acting like Freeman would be the starting QB going forward. Lateral move, maybe. Better depth, absolutely!

Freeman is better than McGloin and Flynn. That is what matters. Can he be better than Pryor, possibly. Will this prevent the FO from looking at QBs in the draft..... doubtful.

And for those bringing up the Olson connection, it's obvious. But don't be so pedantic to think that Allen and McKenzie haven't watched him play and know what he may be able to bring. The fact Olson has worked w/ him in the past is a bonus.

Just like they watched Flynn play & knew what he could bring to the table......the fact that McKenzie saw him in GB was a bonus.


Am I doing it right?


Well Flynn was your boy right.... so you tell me. Laughing Laughing

And Reggie said in his PC's about Flynn that he could compete. He wasn't pounding the table for him exactly. More that they needed a QB and he knew what he was getting in Flynn. Also, what options were there outside of Flynn?

Also drafting Wilson and adding McGloin showed the Packer philosophy.... You can never have enough QBs.

So yeah, I don't think the FO expected Flynn to be their long term solution. They are trying to plug and play and find the right guy.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrapTakula


Moderator
Joined: 17 Jan 2007
Posts: 9345
Location: Gilead
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
91jmay wrote:
Or you know, if in a few weeks time (after bye) Pryor struggles we put Freeman in and see what he can do.

Was that really hard to work out?


This.

You can never have enough QBs when you don't have a franchise one. Freeman adds better depth, competition and a possible starter going into next season.

If people are 'concerned' taking the job from Pryor, you are not that confident in Pryor clearly.


I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to bringing him in as a backup (qb depth is super important) but I would worry that it might put a lot of extra pressure on our current qb.

He wins the job, plays 3 games w/o losing it and then you bring in someone else to "compete" or "push him". Then he has to worry not just about the other team every week, but also about the guy brought in for his spot AND the idea that (true or not) the coaches lack confidence in him.

That's a lot to put on basically a rookie qb in the nfl.
_________________


Bolansho Boro Begoz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Professor Oak


Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 3843
Location: Pallet Town
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
Professor Oak wrote:
Yet another lateral move at the QB position if this happens...


Some of you are acting like Freeman would be the starting QB going forward. Lateral move, maybe. Better depth, absolutely!

Freeman is better than McGloin and Flynn. That is what matters. Can he be better than Pryor, possibly. Will this prevent the FO from looking at QBs in the draft..... doubtful.

Better depth? Yes. But at what cost?

Bringing in a 25 year old QB at this juncture could sabotage Pryor's development & potentially lose the entire locker room.

I don't think much of Pryor right now, but no one can deny he has the potential. How much potential? I don't know. He's progressed fairly well and with only 3 games played, I'd hate to sabotage his growth by bringing in a guy like Freeman who wants nothing less than the starting job.

I know I'm in the minority with this, but then again, I'm not very high on Freeman to begin with. Average QB with iffy character and questionable work ethic. I'm not even taking in the recent reports about what went on with TB this year either. Who knows what's true & what's not. Regardless, I've heard nothing but negative things about him since he was still in college.
_________________
(o◕ ‿‿◕o)//
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BlackPrestige92


Joined: 08 Nov 2011
Posts: 6187
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In a way Freeman needs to get here. This needs to end. ALL OF IT.

He'd make sure it does by sucking, getting the current regime fired, making the new regime give up on him, TP, McGloin, Wilson, etc.

A new era would literally begin with high draft picks, lots of cap room, some corner guys like JV and Lamarr.

I love TP and I have high hopes for him but it's clear he's not wanted and he'll look back at his time in the NFL as a bad one in which he gt a raw deal. Freeman needs to be signed so what needs to happen happens.......

I'm sick and tired of this crap.
_________________


的f Phil Jackson came back, still no coaching me, I知 uncoachable, I知 unsociable.
-Kendrick Lamar
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCOUGHMAN


Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 14932
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Franky Rey wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Franky Rey wrote:
I would hate to sign Freeman at this point.

Just let Pryor play the season to see what he's got.

He's not going to play great every game so I'd hate for the coaches to throw Freeman in if Pryor has a stretch of bad play.

I can't really see Freeman having that much to offer anyways.


I don't get this logic. So don't have a solid backup plan if Pryor falters? Or what if he takes another hit running and can't go.

Trusting an URFA QB to fill in just because is misguided.

A 24 year old QB w/ starting experience is nothing but a help to a team w/ limited options at the position. If Pryor bust out, you now have trade bait. If not, you have an option at QB.
I'd just reiterate what holyghost said in that I'm not afraid he would outperform Pryor but I'd be afraid that he'll be handed the starting position just because he's more "traditional" and seems to fit in better with Olsen's scheme.

About Pryor faltering, I say let him. He's a young QB who is going to make mistakes. If we sign Freeman, I have a feeling the coaches are going to be trigger happy in putting him.

Just let Pryor play the season. Barring a season ending injury the next few weeks, I would stay away from Freeman at least until the offseason.

It's not like we're contending for a playoff spot or anything anyways. This season has almost always been the closest thing to a wash as you can get.

Pryor has been one of the lone sparks in a mostly dismal offense so far. Don't ruin it.


this and just like cp he isnt going to sign to be a backup he will come if they promise him the #1 spot.
_________________


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
agarcia34


Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 3939
PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Freeman wants to start then he should go to the Vikings.
_________________
#Dodgers
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 - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 6 of 8

 
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