What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2016 Oakland Raiders thread (3 Viewers)

LawFitz said:
Carr's pinky is hurting his accuracy.

If Amari TD really was affected by camera wire, that's bush league.
Click to expand...
No question -- Carr in an post-game interview said he wasn't cold and the pinky felt so good he didn't need to wear a glove, but I don't believe him. Maybe it got banged again in the game, but there was a flutter and poor accuracy that comes from holding the ball with less than four fingers. 

re: the ball hitting the wire, seems like this would be way eadier to confirm, either by replays we have, or even from skycam footage itself. Either way, it's a lost cause as they wouldn't have done anything about it even if it was clear that was the culprit. Same way that bouncing a kickoff or punt off the giant midfield scoreboard in Dallas is fine.

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
No question -- Carr in an post-game interview said he wasn't cold and the pinky felt so good he didn't need to wear a glove, but I don't believe him. Maybe it got banged again in the game, but there was a flutter and poor accuracy that comes from holding the ball with less than four fingers. 

re: the ball hitting the wire, seems like this would be way eadier to confirm, either by replays we have, or even from skycam footage itself. Either way, it's a lost cause as they wouldn't have done anything about it even if it was clear that was the culprit. Same way that bouncing a kickoff or punt off the giant midfield scoreboard in Dallas is fine.
Click to expand...
They have re-kicked punts that hit the Dallas scoreboard.  The rules clearly call for a re-playing of the down.

There won't be video confirmation of the pass because it's absolutely inexcusable that the wire was remotely in a spot to be hit.  The NFL can't get out of its own way and this is just another moronic thing they let happen because they don't consider the consequences.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Disappointing no doubt, but not the end of the world.  I didn't like the play calls/decisions at the end at all.  Probably a better option than to target Holmes covered by Peters on third and 1, which would have been better being a run anyway given how the game went and the fourth down play was just bad.

 
ICON211 said:
Disappointing no doubt, but not the end of the world.  I didn't like the play calls/decisions at the end at all.  Probably a better option than to target Holmes covered by Peters on third and 1, which would have been better being a run anyway given how the game went and the fourth down play was just bad.
Click to expand...
The play calls were a little strange last night.  If you QB and WRs are struggling and your running game is doing ok, why not run it?  Tired of the cuteness on O.  Play to your strengths. 

 
DocHolliday said:
The play calls were a little strange last night.  If you QB and WRs are struggling and your running game is doing ok, why not run it?  Tired of the cuteness on O.  Play to your strengths. 
Click to expand...
you think that cuteness is bad you should try being a packer fan and watching McCarthy's play calling all season... 

 
Hankmoody said:
They have re-kicked punts that hit the Dallas scoreboard.  The rules clearly call for a re-playing of the down.
Click to expand...
Did rules change? Could swear I remember a game against the Saints where it riccocheted off of the board, Saints caught rebound with no return for some sick field position. 

Maybe it was a preseason game though?

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
Did rules change? Could swear I remember a game against the Saints where it riccocheted off of the board, Saints caught rebound with no return for some sick field position. 

Maybe it was a preseason game though?
Click to expand...
Looks like we're both right

http://www.espn.com/nfl/news/story?id=4428556

That article says it was only for that (2009) season and would be reviewed after the season.  I can't find anything concrete, but you are correct about the Saints:

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2014/9/28/6861331/cowboys-punt-hits-at-t-stadiums-giant-scoreboard-gives-saints-good

That one was in 2014.  Just for good measure, it happened again in 2015 and, or course they re-kicked it

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/09/04/shane-lechler-punt-hits-cowboys-video-board/

Just another thing the NFL bungled.

 
Chaka said:
Day One next year I think we would all like the Raiders to go after the best DB available.  We need a guy who can play with Tyr :eek:  Hill for the next 6 years.
Click to expand...


So refreshing to not be digging into draft options at this point in the season.

Part of me wants to say "don't mention the draft yet and ruin the buzz of this season!!!"

but I just realized that I got a little excited thinking about this upcoming draft as being the "final pieces to put us over the top".

But we'll cross that bridge when this exciting season comes to an end (with us as surprise super bowl winners ;) )

 
Vic Tafur ‏@VicTafur  13m13 minutes ago
The #Raiders are meeting today with league officials & Lott Group to discuss proposal to keep the team in Oakland, @nflnetwork reporting

 
32 Counter Pass said:
Speaking of Walford,io when the heck is he going to emerge? Rivera has been more relevant than Walford recently. Needles to say, Walford has been a disappointment in my eyes. A threat at TE is what this team is really missing. 
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just me but it seems like he Ddrops more than his fair share of balls. Love the pedigree but lets see it translate to the field.

 
FreshiZ said:
Maybe it's just me but it seems like he Ddrops more than his fair share of balls. Love the pedigree but lets see it translate to the field.
Click to expand...
You can say that about all the receivers lately. Mid season it seemed like Rivera was on the outside looking in. But the past few games he's seeing more snaps. Maybe it's more of a reflection on Rivera than Walford. That being said, I was expecting Walford to have a break out season, but he hasn't quite put it all together yet. 

 
Anyone nervous coming into this game? Smells a little trappy to me.

You have the Raiders still controlling their own destiny more than not against a 5-8 Charger team who just dropped their last 2 straight and are 3-3 at home. We beat them before in the Hole, and have the friendliest road stadium with warm weather this week. Gordon might be out or limited. Definitely a game we should win on paper (we've won our last 3 against them), and likely IRL as well.

But. 

Carr looked so erratic against the Chiefs -- while it was weird he seemed much better with it against the Bills, there was clearly something wrong. He has more time to heal this week, but was a little worrisome seeing all the inaccuracy and flutter in his normally tight spiralled, deft touch passes. As aforementioned, his receivers were littering the field with drops even when passes arrived on time and target. We should have Osemele back, but could lose Joseph again (haven't seen any updates on him) -- we clearly need both for us to be that much more effective.

For their part, SD can also hurt us where we're weak -- TE seams, big pass plays. Rivers and the Chargers staff know us well, and you know they are going to be fired up to ruin what has been a storybook season for their hated rivals. I believe they think a lot more about us than we do about them, which is why the temptation may be there to look past the Chargers.

Line is only 3 (having opened at 2.5) -- so not a huge Vegas vote of confidence in the Raiders wiping the field with powder blue, as we so much want to see and maybe expect.

Honestly a little nervous here that we're walking into a trap game, which would effectively close the door that much more on our hopes of regaining division lead, and depending on how other games go, also open the door slightly wider for Denver and maybe even the Fins (though it seems like a longshot) to challenge a wildcard berth. 

 
I'd love for Carr to have a bad game. Sorry Raiders fans, but it'd be the difference of about $100 for me, at least. Possibly $200. You guys don't mind, right? It's just 1 game. 

 
There have been 50 Super Bowls played.  The Steelers have played in 8.  The Patriots have played in 8.  The Broncos have played in 8.  Combined, those 3 teams account for 24 AFC titles.  One shy of 50%.  It gets even worse when you look at Super Bowls played in the 21st century.  

There have been 16 Super Bowls in the 21st century.

Patriots: 6

Steelers: 3

Broncos: 2

Of the remaining 4 super bowls this century, The Ravens have played 2, The Colts have played in 2, and the Raiders have played in 1.  If the Raiders win the AFC this year, it creates a perfect symmetry and they even up with the Ravens and Colts with 2 AFC titles each.

Of course, the Patriots currently sit with HFA, the Steelers are in first place in the North, and the Broncos would be a wild card, so they could collectively capture their 12 AFC title this year instead.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its possible that your 6 AFC playoff teams will be the Patriots, Steelers, Raiders, Colts, Ravens, and Broncos.  In other words the only 6 teams to win the AFC this century.

 
How much longer is Goodell and the front office going to pick their arses about Aldon?

They met and STILL no timetable from that a$$hat of a commish.

How do the Raiders not have an appeal process, given that it's arguable that Goodell is costing us a better chance to win?

How is the NFLPA not up in arms about this? I mean, doesn't the collective bargaining agreement allot for a 60 day decision since his reinstatement in October?

Maybe I'm missing something, but seems inexcuseable that the process is still so amorphous and up in the air/up to Goodell's whimsy.

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
How much longer is Goodell and the front office going to pick their arses about Aldon?

They met and STILL no timetable from that a$$hat of a commish.

How do the Raiders not have an appeal process, given that it's arguable that Goodell is costing us a better chance to win?

How is the NFLPA not up in arms about this? I mean, doesn't the collective bargaining agreement allot for a 60 day decision since his reinstatement in October?

Maybe I'm missing something, but seems inexcuseable that the process is still so amorphous and up in the air/up to Goodell's whimsy.
Click to expand...
Was coming in here to post something similar, completely ridiculous.

 
32 Counter Pass said:
Very surprised the union hasn't been more vocal about this. It gets to the heart of their complaint about Goddell having too much power. 
Click to expand...
The union is there to protect the 99.9% of the players, not the single guys who landed them in a terrible situation and have already been suspended a number of times.  

But yes, the amount of time already lost for Aldon is a bit dumb.

 
What about Smith's agent? Lawyers? I get that Smith likely doesn't want to rock the boat, but it's costing him money, it's potentially costing the Raiders some needed impactful depth, and above all, it's overtly ridiculous without reason.

 
Aldon was suspended indefinitely, not for a year.  

He can re-apply after a year, but that's different than being suspended for a year.  

 
kaso said:
The union is there to protect the 99.9% of the players, not the single guys who landed them in a terrible situation and have already been suspended a number of times.  

But yes, the amount of time already lost for Aldon is a bit dumb.
Click to expand...
The union is there to protect all the players, but more importantly the CBA. The date for reviewing Smith's status has long past. Said another way, management is not honoring the CBA agreement. It is surprising to me that the union hasn't been more vocal about this issue because it is a slippery slope.

 
32 Counter Pass said:
The union is there to protect all the players, but more importantly the CBA. The date for reviewing Smith's status has long past. Said another way, management is not honoring the CBA agreement. It is surprising to me that the union hasn't been more vocal about this issue because it is a slippery slope.
Click to expand...
This.

I just read that it's a "Stage Three" offense, with the following stipulations:

“After completion of the one-year banishment period, the Commissioner, in his sole discretion, will determine if and when the Player will be allowed to return to the NFL. A Player’s failure to adhere to his treatment plan during his banishment will be a significant consideration in the Commissioner’s decision.”

Smith voluntarily went to treatment, which is good. I think he waited until July to enter rehab, which isn't so good, but for all intents and purposes, the guy has done more than his time now, and even graced Goodell's presence as a kneeling supplicant in the meeting they just had.

There is no other reason for Goodell to delay this outside of him being a complete jackass and wanting to punish the Raiders as well as Smith. 

This is the exact thing that player's unions are supposed to ardently fight against. Just really surprised there isn't more sturm und drang to push this forward instead of just the...waiting....

 
There's more to it though, the NFL isn't held to strict timeline to respond.  There are a couple of caveats like "if the player doesn't provide all necessary info" and "if the commissioner doesn't get feedback from" whoever the people that need to give him feedback.  I found a lot of details when Gordon was going through the same thing but it's buried in the Josh Gordon thread somewhere.

Bottom line there's nothing solid required of the NFL.  Another NFLPA decision to go after bigger salary for the 99.9% while sacrificing the .1%.

 
Interesting, @Hankmoody, that's a good perspective.

Hankmoody said:
"if the player doesn't provide all necessary info" and "if the commissioner doesn't get feedback from" whoever the people that need to give him feedback.
Click to expand...
So I'm Aldon. I did my time -- more than it, now, actually -- and now all I really want to do is just get paid, and get out on the field. I think I'd be motivated to fulfill that first caveat. As for the second clause, the fact that there are no checks and balances on due process here is, for some reason, maddening to me.

Look, I know it's not anything new. The NFL and its commissioner has always been granted the broadest autonomy by the owners (and speaking of owners, isn't the commissioner ultimately responsible to them, and as such, doesn't Mark get any sway here?).

And we know Goodell doesn't know his rear from his elbow. But the fact that the commissioner can drag this out on a whim, and have no compulsion or bias for action to just get any damned info needed in a reasonable time and make a decision on an agreed date, makes me anarchistic and want to tear down this system that flies in the face of simple reason.

Hankmoody said:
Another NFLPA decision to go after bigger salary for the 99.9% while sacrificing the .1%
Click to expand...
Also interesting -- what do you mean by this?

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
Interesting, @Hankmoody, that's a good perspective.

So I'm Aldon. I did my time -- more than it, now, actually -- and now all I really want to do is just get paid, and get out on the field. I think I'd be motivated to fulfill that first caveat. As for the second clause, the fact that there are no checks and balances on due process here is, for some reason, maddening to me.

Look, I know it's not anything new. The NFL and its commissioner has always been granted the broadest autonomy by the owners (and speaking of owners, isn't the commissioner ultimately responsible to them, and as such, doesn't Mark get any sway here?).

And we know Goodell doesn't know his rear from his elbow. But the fact that the commissioner can drag this out on a whim, and have no compulsion or bias for action to just get any damned info needed in a reasonable time and make a decision on an agreed date, makes me anarchistic and want to tear down this system that flies in the face of simple reason.
Click to expand...
Part of that is that a whole bunch of people have to do their part before Goodell can even review it.  Reports, analysis, etc.  Then Goodell has to actually go through all that info, understand it and make a decision.  He might want to talk to people or clarify stuff.  Oh, and he has a league full of other owners, players, and fans to run none of which went and got themselves suspended.

I did find the source:

https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/Agents/SOAPolicy2016.pdf

Appendix B (read this there's a bunch of stuff here I can't copy/paste)

"all individuals involved in the process will take steps to enable the Commissioner to render a decision within 60 days of the receipt of the application."

And it's worth noting there is no language explicitly stating how long Goodell has to decide.  Just that people need to get info to him within 60 days.

Stompin' Tom Connors said:
Also interesting -- what do you mean by this?
Click to expand...
Everything the players have and don't have is a result of bargaining.  Sure, the NFLPA could prioritize a better drug policy, but the owners are going to want something for that.  Pretty much any bargaining point the union takes a stance on means less something they get in other areas (money).  They have 1800 members in the NFLPA and how many run afoul of the policy?   Or get suspended for Personal Conduct?  Why would they give up money that takes away from 100% of their members just to benefit those few that can't keep themselves straight? 

The next CBA will be interesting to see if they put their money where their mouth is.
NFLPA: We want Goodell removed from involvement in player punishment
Owners: Ok, chop 4% off the revenues you're asking for and we have a deal
NFLPA: um

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hankmoody said:
The next CBA will be interesting to see if they put their money where their mouth is.NFLPA: We want Goodell removed from involvement in player punishmentOwners: Ok, we want more contact practices, and more off season time with the rookiesNFLPA: Deal
Click to expand...
Fixed.

The current CBA has curtailed the amount of practice time and off-season time teams are allowed with rookies. This has led to a decline in the quality of play of the field, and contributed to lower tv ratings. 

 
In terms of HFA, which I am still thinking about:

We need to win out, obviously, and finish 13-3, which would be amazing.  And we need help from KC losing to get to the #2 seed, and from NE losing to get to #1 seed.  

KC sched:  TEN, DEN, @SD

NE sched:  @DEN, NYJ, @MIA

This seems to be the only week we can gain on NE, so rooting for DEN this week is a must.  That game could be the difference between a playoff game in OAK between these two teams, and NE in January.  

KC has a much tougher schedule than OAK or NE, and TEN is a tough matchup for them, with their exotic smashmouth, all the TEs they run out there, and no Derrick Johnson.  

Broncos could easily propel our team to the #1 seed.  Umm, GO ORANGE.   :towelwave:

 
I'd rather take the hard road and just cement a wild card than stoop so low as to root for the Broncos.

We made that work before, so....

The enemy of my enemy is my friend works in all situations except for the ones where the Donks are concerned.

;)

 
The young Raiders are in new territory and need to focus on only the next game.  The Raiders must beat SD and look sharp in the process.  It really comes down to Carr.  The D seems to be on track.  

 
This is what Rich Hribar of Rotoworld (whom I respect a great deal) has to say about this matchup:

Bust: Amari Cooper (Cooper did the bulk of his damage in the first meeting between these teams against Steven Williams, who is no longer playing while Casey Hayward has been clamping lead receivers)

This looks like a Crabtree game for those of you who own one or both. I'm considering benching Cooper to be honest. Especially after last week.

 
Tommy Collins said:
This is what Rich Hribar of Rotoworld (whom I respect a great deal) has to say about this matchup:

Bust: Amari Cooper (Cooper did the bulk of his damage in the first meeting between these teams against Steven Williams, who is no longer playing while Casey Hayward has been clamping lead receivers)

This looks like a Crabtree game for those of you who own one or both. I'm considering benching Cooper to be honest. Especially after last week.
Click to expand...
I know this is not the right forum for this discussion but it does impact Carr and the whole O.  Does Hayward stay on the top WR?  If Cooper is locked down and Crabtree is limited due to his finger (or drops a few key catches again) the O may struggle unless they lean on the run game.  SD is not a terrible team.  The Raiders are in for a tough game. 

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
Boom! Playoffs - lock it up. 

Long as they don't draw the Chiefs I like their chances. 
Click to expand...
#### that! If they wanna be true champs you gotta take the hard road.

remember when they could have thrown the Cincinnati game, but didn't, to dodge Pittsburgh in the playoffs? That's how you do it

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hankmoody
2025 Las Vegas Raiders thread - ☠ Brock is back. Not that it matters, but he's back.☠
127 128 129
Replies
6K
Views
417K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU
Hankmoody
2023 Las Vegas Raiders - RIP Jack - one of the greatest Super Bowl moments ever
120 121 122
Replies
6K
Views
308K
LawFitz
LawFitz
Hankmoody
2022 Las Vegas Raiders
94 95 96
Replies
5K
Views
154K
SproutDaddy
SproutDaddy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top