Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 96
  1. #41
    Bring on Vancouver! USCKingsFan31's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,645
    Liked
    1368 times
    Karma
    1671490
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    464 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ASUcruz View Post
    Your assuming all the free agent signings we've had are locks to be successful. I'd say Gibril Wilson be fine but the rest are gambles.

    Walker-Injury issues

    Kelly-Injury issues and has never had one outstanding season season

    Carter-not enough production for his talent, goes back to his OSU days

    Harris-Has been terrible his entire NFL career

    I'm about as optimistic a Raider fan as it gets, but calling this off-season "excellent" is very premature. I would certainly want to supplement these free agent moves with a solid draft, which is why I'm hesitant on this Hall trade.

    I think if it goes through we'll be looking to trade down, especially if the rumors about Hall getting an Asante Samuel type deal are true
    Wilson is solid, Hall is outstanding. Of the four gambles, if one pans out well and one pans out decently, you have to consider that a solid off season.

    Considering how notoriously ****ty of a place Oakland is to play, I don't think you can realistically ask for much better of an offseason.

  2. #42
    Let the kids play ASUcruz's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    11,858
    Liked
    21 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31 View Post
    Wilson is solid, Hall is outstanding. Of the four gambles, if one pans out well and one pans out decently, you have to consider that a solid off season.
    Hall can be outstanding but he can also be a complete idiot. Having 2 outstanding CBs is a great thing but your secondary is only as good as your defensive line. That second round pick could have been used on another dlineman to help our pass rush, I would have been find with a Aso-Washington/Routt secondary if our pass rush was solidified. I don't know if the opportunity cost of trading for Hall is worth that second round pick.

    See your thinking of all our off-season moves as gambles. The Wilson move wasn't a gamble, that was more or less a safe play.

    If 3 of the low end moves are decent but the Walker move is a disaster than it wasn't a solid off-season, plain and simple, considering all the money that was paid to the guy up front. Anyways, you calling this season "excellent" is far too premature.

    Quote Originally Posted by USCkingsfan31
    Considering how notoriously ****ty of a place Oakland is to play, I don't think you can realistically ask for much better of an offseason.
    See your buying into the hype/propaganda that other teams like to throw onto the Raiders. That no one wants to play there, Al Davis is crazy, etc. While Davis might be a bit off his rocker, NFL players will go where the money is. If we offered Travis Henry more guaranteed money he would have signed with us instead of Denver. It's retarded to believe the theory that "Oakland is a ****ty place to play". NFL players love money, that's the bottom line.

    Case in point, the Raiders were thought to be in disarray after Davis traded Gruden away. That off-season we signed Rod Woodson as well as other veteran players(John Parrela being another good example).
    Last edited by ASUcruz; March 15th, 2008 at 05:10 PM.

  3. #43
    Bring on Vancouver! USCKingsFan31's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,645
    Liked
    1368 times
    Karma
    1671490
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    464 Post(s)

    Default

    Of course players go where the money is... but given the option between two similar paydays, Oakland and anywhere else, anywhere else is the likely choice.

    Jerry Porter said it perfectly when he said that it doesn't matter how much talent you have, if you fire your head coach every single year, every year a guy comes in, preaches a new system, everyone has to re-learn it, struggle, coach gets fired, repeat...

    Your oversimplification that "NFL players love money" might be true but it doesn't account for players that love to win or players that like to play for good owners/coaches.

    Even without buying into the bad place to play belief, the team is still 19 - 61 over the last 5 years. It can't be a fun place to play.

    How many teams, in your opinion, have had better off-seasons?

  4. #44
    Let the kids play ASUcruz's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    11,858
    Liked
    21 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31 View Post

    How many teams, in your opinion, have had better off-seasons?
    The NFL off-season isn't as active as any other sports. A lot depends on the draft. By free agent moves alone both Cleveland and Philly had better off-seasons than the Raiders.

    You seem to think that the Raiders just by being active is considered "excellent". It's not, I'm happy that the Raiders are players in the free agent market but just doling out cash doesn't equal a successful off-season, especially taking into account the huge gambles the Raiders have taken in Javon Walker and Tommy Kelly.

    Again, I'm glad the Raiders are active but you can't say this has been an "excellent off-season", certainly not to the point where I would be comfortable giving up draft picks, the jury is still out on basically all our free agent moves with the exception of Gibril Wilson. Active does not equal excellent.

  5. #45
    kjsdkjdf !! sarf's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,335
    Liked
    537 times
    Karma
    1005000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    20 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ASUcruz View Post
    The Raiders like to tout Kelly's versatility. I think we are free to draft a Dorsey or Ellis because Kelly can play DE on first and second down, and on obvious passing downs Kelly can move inside.

    Ellis played some NT at SC but I don't think there's anyway he's able to do that in the NFL. He's simply not big enough to hold up at the point of attack at the NFL level and anyways it would a waste of his quickness and athleticism to ask him to play a 2 gap style. We flat out need more talent along our defensive line. Ellis or Dorsey would do just fine, with Kelly's ability to move around, Ryan would have a lot of guys he could play with along our front 4. Regardless, we really need Terdell Sands to step up his play as he is the only true 2 gap DT on the roster.
    If we plan to draft Dorsey or Ellis to play at UT and move Kelly to DE then I would be upset, Kelly is average at DE. I've never seen anything from him that I liked when he played there, he provides absolutely no pressure and his run defense from there is not good enough that I like him at DE. The only position I would want Kelly to start is UT, that position suits him the best. Ahtyha RubinPat Sims, Marcus Harrison, or Red Bryant are some DT's that I think will be better be looking for in the later rounds. I honestly believe the Raiders payed Kelly all that money to take over Sapps position, so...right now I don't like the chances of us drafting Ellis or Dorsey, until I see I see something were they say Kelly is still a DE, which will piss me off.
    Last edited by sarf; March 15th, 2008 at 07:46 PM.

  6. #46
    Elegant Diehard's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    9,636
    Liked
    414 times
    Karma
    1574552
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    85 Post(s)

    Default

    If these gambles don't pay off we won't feel the effects till a couple years down the road, when they're still pulling in a massive salary and producing jack ****ing crap.

    I do like the Hall trade though. We've really bolstered our secondary with Hall and Wilson. Hopefully Al won't trade away our first round pick, we have a real chance at getting another stud.

  7. #47
    Let the kids play ASUcruz's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    11,858
    Liked
    21 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarf View Post
    If we plan to draft Dorsey or Ellis to play at UT and move Kelly to DE then I would be upset, Kelly is average at DE. I've never seen anything from him that I liked when he played there, he provides absolutely no pressure and his run defense from there is not good enough that I like him at DE. The only position I would want Kelly to start is UT, that position suits him the best. Ahtyha RubinPat Sims, Marcus Harrison, or Red Bryant are some DT's that I think will be better be looking for in the later rounds. I honestly believe the Raiders payed Kelly all that money to take over Sapps position, so...right now I don't like the chances of us drafting Ellis or Dorsey, until I see I see something were they say Kelly is still a DE, which will piss me off.
    I wouldn't mind it. I think the Raiders did pay Kelly all that money to take over Sapp's position but they also did it for his versatility. On running downs, Kelly is a decent RDE to hold up against the run. On passing downs when he moves inside, that gives the Raiders 2 very penetrators provided they draft Dorsey/Ellis. They certainly wouldn't be playing Kelly exclusively at DE, he would be moved around a ton, like he normally is. I don't mind him at DE, he's solid, he's definitely not a a premier DE but he can play at that position and move inside for running downs.

    Here's a quote from Bill Bellicek about Kelly.


    "Tommy Kelly. is one of the best defensive linemen in the league. He's an outstanding player…Kelly plays everywhere. He's a little bit like Howie Long in that Howie Long was a guy that they would move along on the front. They would take Howie and mismatch him against whoever they thought the other team's worst lineman was. There is a little bit of that with Tommy Kelly., too, find a guy that they want to go after and stick him there because he does have the flexibility to play outside and inside. He can pretty much play across the board. He can do everything. Play the run, rush the passer, he's good in pursuit. He's a very physical player. He's pretty good."

  8. #48
    Let the kids play ASUcruz's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    11,858
    Liked
    21 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiehardKingsFan View Post
    If these gambles don't pay off we won't feel the effects till a couple years down the road, when they're still pulling in a massive salary and producing jack ****ing crap.
    The only potential cap killing contracts are Kelly and Walker. And Walker's deal is heavily front loaded(I believe). He got 11 million up front! So cutting bait with him after 2 years or so wouldn't kill us cap wise.

    For all the critisism they get, the Raiders are actually very, very good at managing the cap. We don't have to cheat like the Broncos! So I'm not too worried about "bad deals" killing us, its more the on the field production that gives me pause.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiehardKingsFan
    I do like the Hall trade though. We've really bolstered our secondary with Hall and Wilson. Hopefully Al won't trade away our first round pick, we have a real chance at getting another stud.
    I'm still on the fence with this deal. Reports are the Raiders are willing to give Hall close to what Asante Samuel got. I would rather keep the 2nd round pick and sign Aso a superior player to that deal. The Raiders would be playing with fire if they give Hall that big a deal, I think it would really be hard to re-sign Aso long term.

  9. #49
    I don't rattle, kid. Kubrick's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    16,026
    Liked
    1236 times
    Karma
    1239154
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    604 Post(s)

    Default

    Source: After trade to Raiders, Hall to get seven-year, $70 million deal

    ESPN - Source: After trade to Raiders, Hall to get seven-year, $70 million deal - NFL

    A source told ESPN's Chris Mortensen that the deal is for seven years and worth $70 million. The amount of guaranteed money and bonuses in the contract have not been finalized.

    The source also told Mortensen the teams are discussing possibly more compensation than just a second-round pick for the Raiders to acquire Hall, a two-time All-Pro.

  10. #50
    All Star




    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    5,942
    Liked
    1 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Die Radio Die View Post
    Source: After trade to Raiders, Hall to get seven-year, $70 million deal

    ESPN - Source: After trade to Raiders, Hall to get seven-year, $70 million deal - NFL
    for the life of me I'll never understand Al Davis' hard on for cornerbacks.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28