Lamont Jordan staying in Oakland (1 Viewer)

[TheGreatest]

LaMont Jordan agreed to reduce his roster bonus from $4.75 million to $3 million on Monday, and will stay with the Raiders in 2007.

It's still probable that he'll face competition for his starting job, though we feel he'll win unless Oakland surprises everyone and takes Adrian Peterson with the No. 1 overall pick. Most indications had pointed to Jordan being released and possibly having to settle for a No. 2 job, so this is good news for his keeper league and dynasty league owners.

http://www.ibabuzz.com/raidersblog/2007/03...jordan-to-stay/

 

[LHUCKS]

A picture tells a thousand words.

 

[AtomicDogg97]

As a Browns fan I am relieved. I was worried they might consider Adrian Petersen with the top pick.

 

[kaso]

As a Browns fan I am relieved. I was worried they might consider Adrian Petersen with the top pick.

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

 

[AtomicDogg97]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

 

[kaso]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

Its pretty mixed, from the Raider's message boards I frequent it's a toss up of Russell, AP, or Calvin Johnson, and a couple Quinn's thrown in. Although the Quinn supporters aren't as vocal as they once were.Personally I hope the pick is either Johnson or AP. But that would mean the Raiders would either have Walter or a later drafted QB as the starter - if they don't sign anybody soon.

 

[massraider]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

Its pretty mixed, from the Raider's message boards I frequent it's a toss up of Russell, AP, or Calvin Johnson, and a couple Quinn's thrown in. Although the Quinn supporters aren't as vocal as they once were.

Yep, there's no consensus.Peterson and Johnson supporters are adamant, the Russell and Quinn camps are on the fence.

 

[Britney Spears]

Am I the only one that thinks Andrew Walters could be at least decent?

He had maybe the worst offensive scheme and playcalling in years, and still he battled hard and at times was decent.

I'm not saying he's Peyton Manning, but maybe, just maybe, he could be manageable.

IMO, Calvin and Peterson are elite talents. The QB's in this years draft are not.

I'd take one of the former and ride it for a year with Walter, and potentially a journeyman backup.

 

[Bruno2]

I think they should go after a franchise QB, either draft Russell, or trade down and hope Quinn falls to them. I know that's not Al Davis' MO, but I'm hoping with all the coaching changes Davis has made, maybe...just maybe... Ol' Al realizes his drafting philosophy must change as well, seeing how poorly they have drafted in the first round the past decade or so.

If Davis doesn't go QB I find it hard for him to pass on such a gifted athlete like Calvin Johnson. I think the Gallery pick a few years ago might make him shy away from Thomas, but you never know. Trying to predict the Raiders draft is like trying to predict the next earthquake, you never know where they're coming from.

 

[massraider]

It was impossible to evaluate Walter last year. The O-line was so terrible no one would have looked good.

So his grade right now is Incomplete. So yeah, it seems dumb to write him off. Because he's an unknown.

The flip side of that is, he's an unknown, so you still don't know if he's your QB of the future. And if you look at RB and WR, they aren't really the major questions on this team. QB and the O-line are. I personally have a philosophical problem with taking a WR #1. Any WR.

They are not heavily invested in Walter financially, if they have a guy that they think can be a franchise QB, you don't pass on him because you aren't sure what you have in Walter. You take the franchise guy.

 

[David Yudkin]

Walter barely broke the 50% mark for completion percentage to go along with only 3 TD passes to go along with 13 INTs. Oakland's OL play can account for some of that but not all of it. The times I saw him play he didn't look all that well composed.

 

[Gr00vus]

Am I the only one that thinks Andrew Walters could be at least decent? He had maybe the worst offensive scheme and playcalling in years, and still he battled hard and at times was decent.I'm not saying he's Peyton Manning, but maybe, just maybe, he could be manageable.IMO, Calvin and Peterson are elite talents. The QB's in this years draft are not.I'd take one of the former and ride it for a year with Walter, and potentially a journeyman backup.

I've had this conversation with MassRaider before. He likes Russell, which I can understand, but to my mind I think the thing to do would be to take the best player available, who I believe to be Johnson (maybe Peterson), give Walter another year, get rid of Moss and/or Porter for whatever you can get, spend most of the rest of the draft taking offensive linemen, play '07, reassess after it's over. I think they'll be able to acquire someone as good as Russell next year if Walter really doesn't pan out.

 

[Bruno2]

Walter barely broke the 50% mark for completion percentage to go along with only 3 TD passes to go along with 13 INTs. Oakland's OL play can account for some of that but not all of it. The times I saw him play he didn't look all that well composed.

I hear what your saying David, but like massraider alluded to, anyone would have gotten clobbered behind that OL, coupled with a horrible offensive scheme with mostly 5 and 7 step drops, I can't blame the guy for fearing for his life everytime he stepped under center. I think it would be extremely difficult for any QB to be accurate and composed when he has absolutely zero confidence in his OL, especially the OTs and no confidence in the playcalling. I still think the Raiders should upgrade the QB position, but I think Walter isn't as bad as he looked.

 

[massraider]

First, who's this journeyman QB that we are going to pick up? Give me a name. Because Walter certainly hasn't shown enough to go into the season as the unquestioned starter. Who's out there? David Carr?

Second, if one thinks that Russell/Quinn are both going to be busts, then it's understandable. I don't know, myself. I'm not really buying all the negatives on these guys, tho. Quinn it seems is paralysis by analysis, and Russell came on so fast, it seems to offend people. So they question the work ethic, intelligence, and decision-making. Basically stuff that can't be proved. His private workout is going to be very interesting, IMO. If he weighs 270, and runs a 5.0, well, it'll certainly scare me off.

Not to say that I think they are slam dunks. Sure they aren't perfect prospects. But I heard questions about Young and Leinart. Leinart was slow, and had a weak arm. Young was the stupid 3-year project. I'm sure everyone has 20/20 hindsight now, but if all 4 were in the same draft, I am not so sure that Young and Leinart would be rated over Quinn and Russell. And I know there wouldn't be a consensus.

Speaking in general terms, we've traded the #7 pick for a WR, and two short years later, we are looking at a WR with the #1 overall pick. A poor man's Detriot Lions is no way to go through life.

The biggest thing to me is this:

Let's say Walter isn't the guy. And we find that out this year.

Now, we go into next year, with another high pick. Do we take a QB then? What if people decide Brohm or whoever has some question marks too? Let's say we do take a QB next year. Well, now we have one less year of QB development. One more year we have to wait, while the young QB we take develops. Meantime, Leinart is entering his third year, Quinn and Russell their second. Peterson/Johnson waste two years. At least.

We take a QB this year, and a RB next year, we are more likely to be in a position to compete sooner. RB's can either run or they can't. They can help you immediately.

 

[softball]

Why wouldn't they take Calvin at the #1 and add Drew Stanton at 2.1? Or AP and Stanton, give them a few years to develope and you have the second coming of LT2/Brees

 

[Gr00vus]

Well, now we have one less year of QB development. One more year we have to wait, while the young QB we take develops. Meantime, Leinart is entering his third year, Quinn and Russell their second. Peterson/Johnson waste two years. At least.

You also have one less year of a young QB being introduced to the NFL behind an offensive line that is attempting to move from being the worst in the NFL to at least adequate. To me that's a big factor. WRs have a pretty decent shelf life, and they often take a year or two to mature anyway - I don't see Johnson as a waste. I think taking him and waiting on QB while the OLine develops is a better course of action.

 

[massraider]

Well, now we have one less year of QB development. One more year we have to wait, while the young QB we take develops. Meantime, Leinart is entering his third year, Quinn and Russell their second. Peterson/Johnson waste two years. At least.

You also have one less year of a young QB being introduced to the NFL behind an offensive line that is attempting to move from being the worst in the NFL to at least adequate. To me that's a big factor. WRs have a pretty decent shelf life, and they often take a year or two to mature anyway - I don't see Johnson as a waste. I think taking him and waiting on QB while the OLine develops is a better course of action.

Who says he has to even play? Bengals did alright sitting out Palmer for a year. With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

 

[Bruno2]

Walter barely broke the 50% mark for completion percentage to go along with only 3 TD passes to go along with 13 INTs. Oakland's OL play can account for some of that but not all of it. The times I saw him play he didn't look all that well composed.

I hear what your saying David, but like massraider alluded to, anyone would have gotten clobbered behind that OL, coupled with a horrible offensive scheme with mostly 5 and 7 step drops, I can't blame the guy for fearing for his life everytime he stepped under center. I think it would be extremely difficult for any QB to be accurate and composed when he has absolutely zero confidence in his OL, especially the OTs and no confidence in the playcalling. I still think the Raiders should upgrade the QB position, but I think Walter isn't as bad as he looked.

Back on topic...Couldn't the same be said for Jordan. Is it really fair the judge his performance on last years dismal OL play and playcalling? Aside from the injuries Jordan is a solid RB, not the flashiest or most gifted RB in the NFL, but his is a chain-mover and he still has enough talent to break off some long runs. How quickly we forget the solid season he had in Norv Turner's offense in '05. How many of us out there drafted him in the late 1st round/ early 2nd this past season? The only thing that scares me away from Jordan is his running style seems to lead to injuries.

 

[massraider]

Walter barely broke the 50% mark for completion percentage to go along with only 3 TD passes to go along with 13 INTs. Oakland's OL play can account for some of that but not all of it. The times I saw him play he didn't look all that well composed.

I hear what your saying David, but like massraider alluded to, anyone would have gotten clobbered behind that OL, coupled with a horrible offensive scheme with mostly 5 and 7 step drops, I can't blame the guy for fearing for his life everytime he stepped under center. I think it would be extremely difficult for any QB to be accurate and composed when he has absolutely zero confidence in his OL, especially the OTs and no confidence in the playcalling. I still think the Raiders should upgrade the QB position, but I think Walter isn't as bad as he looked.

Back on topic...Couldn't the same be said for Jordan. Is it really fair the judge his performance on last years dismal OL play and playcalling? Aside from the injuries Jordan is a solid RB, not the flashiest or most gifted RB in the NFL, but his is a chain-mover and he still has enough talent to break off some long runs. How quickly we forget the solid season he had in Norv Turner's offense in '05. How many of us out there drafted him in the late 1st round/ early 2nd this past season? The only thing that scares me away from Jordan is his running style seems to lead to injuries.

Actually, he's not a chain mover, IMO. He dances too much behind the line, and he was fat last year. This was before his injury.With a less-than stellar line, one would like to think the back would hit the hole as quickly as possible, before it closes. Jordan occasionally had running lanes, but diddled around too much behind the line, and would get tackled for a loss. Some of those were the line's fault, and some were not.Lamont Jordan wouldn't preclude me from taking a Peterson or Lynch.

 

[DeepOut]

What exactly have the Raiders done in the off season to fix their OL? If they're not working on that, the rest of this discussion regarding skill players is a waste of time. So why not take Joe Thomas, or trade down and pick up acouple of solid OL prospects?

 

[Avery]

What exactly have the Raiders done in the off season to fix their OL? If they're not working on that, the rest of this discussion regarding skill players is a waste of time. So why not take Joe Thomas, or trade down and pick up acouple of solid OL prospects?

I was thinking the same thing.Although the high draft pick used on Gallery may account for the Raiders being gun-shy to draft an OL early in the first and Davis' propensity to go for the "flash" of a skill position guy is always a factor, at some point the Raiders have to work on their OL... don't they?Edit to add: Just taking a look at the Raiders draft history and I was surprised to see that 1996 (rRicky Dudley ) was the last time the Raiders drafted an offensive skill position player in the 1st.

 

[Phurfur]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

Its pretty mixed, from the Raider's message boards I frequent it's a toss up of Russell, AP, or Calvin Johnson, and a couple Quinn's thrown in. Although the Quinn supporters aren't as vocal as they once were.Personally I hope the pick is either Johnson or AP. But that would mean the Raiders would either have Walter or a later drafted QB as the starter - if they don't sign anybody soon.

They should be looking at Thomas. Their O line is terrible.

 

[fruity pebbles]

They're paying him 4 million this year. Doesn't mean they won't take Peterson, but I think it reduces the chances greatly. Doesn't make sense to me that they'd pay him that kind of money if they were planning on drafting a franchise back. They have plenty of other needs to spend that cash on.

 

[massraider]

What exactly have the Raiders done in the off season to fix their OL?

Very little. Unfortunately, OT is the problem, and the FA guys have been OG's. And I'll be honest with you, I'm quite happy with my team not dropping 50 mill on a G. Those signings were absurd, IMO.They have two young guards they like, and questions at both tackles. There are rumors that Gallery may move back to RT, and Sims back to LT. Which would actually be an upgrade at both positions. Grove at C is a question mark. They have brought in Tom Cable, the line coach from Atlanta, so there is the possibilty that more of a zone blocking scheme may be in the offing.

 

[Garts]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

Its pretty mixed, from the Raider's message boards I frequent it's a toss up of Russell, AP, or Calvin Johnson, and a couple Quinn's thrown in. Although the Quinn supporters aren't as vocal as they once were.Personally I hope the pick is either Johnson or AP. But that would mean the Raiders would either have Walter or a later drafted QB as the starter - if they don't sign anybody soon.

They should be looking at Thomas. Their O line is terrible.

Wouldn't they be OL gun-shy after taking the sure thing in Gallery a few years ago??

 

[Gr00vus]

With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

It sure seems to me that at this point just about every position on offense is a need, WR included. I like Curry, but I think the other two are dead weight that needs to be cleared at this point. Don't pull a Sam Bowie.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Here comes JaMarcus Russell.

 

[Bruno2]

Walter barely broke the 50% mark for completion percentage to go along with only 3 TD passes to go along with 13 INTs. Oakland's OL play can account for some of that but not all of it. The times I saw him play he didn't look all that well composed.

I hear what your saying David, but like massraider alluded to, anyone would have gotten clobbered behind that OL, coupled with a horrible offensive scheme with mostly 5 and 7 step drops, I can't blame the guy for fearing for his life everytime he stepped under center. I think it would be extremely difficult for any QB to be accurate and composed when he has absolutely zero confidence in his OL, especially the OTs and no confidence in the playcalling. I still think the Raiders should upgrade the QB position, but I think Walter isn't as bad as he looked.

Back on topic...Couldn't the same be said for Jordan. Is it really fair the judge his performance on last years dismal OL play and playcalling? Aside from the injuries Jordan is a solid RB, not the flashiest or most gifted RB in the NFL, but his is a chain-mover and he still has enough talent to break off some long runs. How quickly we forget the solid season he had in Norv Turner's offense in '05. How many of us out there drafted him in the late 1st round/ early 2nd this past season? The only thing that scares me away from Jordan is his running style seems to lead to injuries.

Actually, he's not a chain mover, IMO. He dances too much behind the line, and he was fat last year. This was before his injury.With a less-than stellar line, one would like to think the back would hit the hole as quickly as possible, before it closes. Jordan occasionally had running lanes, but diddled around too much behind the line, and would get tackled for a loss. Some of those were the line's fault, and some were not.Lamont Jordan wouldn't preclude me from taking a Peterson or Lynch.

Well, I'll agree with you there, he does dance around behind the line too much. But IMO I attributed that to the OL. They were so bad most of the time, there were no holes to hit, which made Jordan look worse than he is IMO.

 

[Bruno2]

What exactly have the Raiders done in the off season to fix their OL? If they're not working on that, the rest of this discussion regarding skill players is a waste of time. So why not take Joe Thomas, or trade down and pick up acouple of solid OL prospects?

I was thinking the same thing.Although the high draft pick used on Gallery may account for the Raiders being gun-shy to draft an OL early in the first and Davis' propensity to go for the "flash" of a skill position guy is always a factor, at some point the Raiders have to work on their OL... don't they?

They let Langston Walker go to the Bills, addition by subtraction I guess.

 

[massraider]

With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

It sure seems to me that at this point just about every position on offense is a need, WR included. I like Curry, but I think the other two are dead weight that needs to be cleared at this point. Don't pull a Sam Bowie.

I've been watching the Chiefs and Chargers kick the crap out of us the last few years with McCardell, Kennison, and a bunch of stiffs. Excuse me if I disagree that this dynamic WR is the right move.

 

[Avery]

With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

It sure seems to me that at this point just about every position on offense is a need, WR included. I like Curry, but I think the other two are dead weight that needs to be cleared at this point. Don't pull a Sam Bowie.

I've been watching the Chiefs and Chargers kick the crap out of us the last few years with McCardell, Kennison, and a bunch of stiffs. Excuse me if I disagree that this dynamic WR is the right move.

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

 

[Slider]

It didn't look like a huge OLine problem as much as the ever developing 13 step drop plays the O was calling.

 

[massraider]

With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

It sure seems to me that at this point just about every position on offense is a need, WR included. I like Curry, but I think the other two are dead weight that needs to be cleared at this point. Don't pull a Sam Bowie.

I've been watching the Chiefs and Chargers kick the crap out of us the last few years with McCardell, Kennison, and a bunch of stiffs. Excuse me if I disagree that this dynamic WR is the right move.

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

Ummm.....I agree. What I don't see is the team with great WR's leading to them to the promised land, with crappy QB's and RB's. Hey, maybe the Raiders and the Lions will be the first. That'll be exciting.

 

[Gr00vus]

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

The lesson to be learned there is to take the best player you can. The Chargers traded out of Vick even though they desparately needed a QB (along with just about everything else on offense, very similar to the Raiders situation) to take the guy they identified as the best player available in the draft. The Chiefs already had Priest Holmes - yet they drafted Larry Johnson anyway. Granted he wasn't a high 1st rounder, but still.C. Johnson looks to be a pretty special talent. I don't see that in Russell, I think you can get a Russell equivalent next year, while waiting to see if the guy you already have can fit the bill behind a better line.

 

[Avery]

With the worst offense ever, drafting at a position that is not a need, and has among the highest bust rates in the first round, is not my preferred plan of action.

It sure seems to me that at this point just about every position on offense is a need, WR included. I like Curry, but I think the other two are dead weight that needs to be cleared at this point. Don't pull a Sam Bowie.

I've been watching the Chiefs and Chargers kick the crap out of us the last few years with McCardell, Kennison, and a bunch of stiffs. Excuse me if I disagree that this dynamic WR is the right move.

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

Ummm.....I agree. What I don't see is the team with great WR's leading to them to the promised land, with crappy QB's and RB's. Hey, maybe the Raiders and the Lions will be the first. That'll be exciting.

Again, not saying that Calvin Johnson should be the pick, but I don't think the lesson learned from the success of the Chiefs and Chargers is that WRs aren't important. Rather, I think the lesson is to win you need very good offensive skill players somewhere on your team. Furthermore, if you're most talented players are receivers (TEs or WRs) your QB must be adequate enough to get them the ball.

 

[massraider]

It didn't look like a huge OLine problem as much as the ever developing 13 step drop plays the O was calling.

Eh, it's a lot of both.The coaches didn't do them any favors, but Walker and Gallery were getting beat. Grove was getting pushed around. Now, it made it easier on the DE's and OLB's, because they knew they could just pin their ears back and head 10 yards upfield. Shell and Walsh's insistence in constant 7 step drops was mind-boggling. Maybe the worst coaching I've ever seen on the pro level. I don't think they had any 3 step drops in their gameplan. The rookies, one from Weber State, and one from Cornell, got thrown to the wolves, but did alright, all things considered. Right now, McQuistan is penciled in at LG, and Boothe at RG. Honestly, Boothe was their best lineman last year.

 

[Al Toon's Mole]

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

The lesson to be learned there is to take the best player you can. The Chargers traded out of Vick even though they desparately needed a QB (along with just about everything else on offense, very similar to the Raiders situation) to take the guy they identified as the best player available in the draft. The Chiefs already had Priest Holmes - yet they drafted Larry Johnson anyway. Granted he wasn't a high 1st rounder, but still.C. Johnson looks to be a pretty special talent. I don't see that in Russell, I think you can get a Russell equivalent next year, while waiting to see if the guy you already have can fit the bill behind a better line.

JaMarcus Russell = Byron Leftwich.Take the shot on CJ and go with a guy that can really keep a defense honest. The Raiders can always draft a QB in a later round or still possibly in the FA market, though it is getting slim.

 

[massraider]

Again, not saying that Calvin Johnson should be the pick, but I don't think the lesson learned from the success of the Chiefs and Chargers is that WRs aren't important. Rather, I think the lesson is to win you need very good offensive skill players somewhere on your team. Furthermore, if you're most talented players are receivers (TEs or WRs) your QB must be adequate enough to get them the ball.

I was kind of making a joke with that point to Gr00vus, hence the .But I'll take up this argument, because it's an easy one to argue. You don't win building around franchise WR's. You have a solid running game, and a solid QB, suddenly average WR's look great.

You take Calvin Johnson if you are sure that Quinn, Russell and Peterson are going to be busts.

I know you're not saying that Calvin should be the pick, but you kind of keep arguing for it. I am saying that Calvin should absolutely not be the pick. With that QB play, RB play, and O-line play last year, we're gonna take a WR? Really? no thanks.

 

[massraider]

Not that i necessarily think that WR is the way for the Raiders to go, but it's a Hell of a lot easier to go with "a bunch of stiffs" at WR when you have Priest Holmes/Larry Johnson or LT in the backfield, and Gonzales or Gates running patterns, rather than the dynamic duo of Lamont Jordan and Cortney Anderson.

The lesson to be learned there is to take the best player you can. The Chargers traded out of Vick even though they desparately needed a QB (along with just about everything else on offense, very similar to the Raiders situation) to take the guy they identified as the best player available in the draft. The Chiefs already had Priest Holmes - yet they drafted Larry Johnson anyway. Granted he wasn't a high 1st rounder, but still.C. Johnson looks to be a pretty special talent. I don't see that in Russell, I think you can get a Russell equivalent next year, while waiting to see if the guy you already have can fit the bill behind a better line.

JaMarcus Russell = Byron Leftwich.Take the shot on CJ and go with a guy that can really keep a defense honest. The Raiders can always draft a QB in a later round or still possibly in the FA market, though it is getting slim.

We already drafted a QB in the later round, he's stil on the team. And we've already taken the vet QB. A few times. Like to maybe try a new strategy.BTW, I prefer Russell=Roethlisberger. Is that OK, even though Ben is white?

 

[TDavi118]

Having him restructure doesn't mean they won't take AP. There are already rumors flying around that the Raiders weren't overally impressed with Russell.... so that door isn't closed just yet.

Who do Raiders fans want them to take?

I've been a Raidwr fan for 30 years,... we need Russell,.............period!

 

[Gr00vus]

The thing is the Raiders are way more than one player away from the promised land. It's unrealistic to expect (and I don't think MassRaider really does even though he keeps using that phrase) whoever it is that comes in this year to take them from zero to champ. Last year was a good year to draft a qb. I don't see that this year. Why fight it? Hopefully having the #1 pick doesn't roll around that often, but when it does, make the most of it. Take the best guy you can and work from there.

I don't interview these people, and I'm no insider. I don't think anyone truly knows if Walter is not an NFL quality starter at this point - we just haven't seen what he can do on anything but a disaster area offense. If the Raiders after their analysis decide Johnson or Peterson is the best player in the draft (and that's the assumption I'm working under given my what I've come to know) and then decide to take a QB I think it's a big mistake. If they truly believe a QB is the best player in the draft, then I've got no problem going that way. I know it can work both ways, but sometimes you can draft LaDainian Tomlinson and Drew Brees.

 

[massraider]

That's what it comes down to, bro. You believe that neither Quinn nor Russell are franchise QB's. I'm not so sure.

And I don't believe teams make picks in a vacuum. You can't just go BPA. At certain points you do, but at #1?

What if the top rated player is a TE? Or a safety?

 

[Avery]

Again, not saying that Calvin Johnson should be the pick, but I don't think the lesson learned from the success of the Chiefs and Chargers is that WRs aren't important. Rather, I think the lesson is to win you need very good offensive skill players somewhere on your team. Furthermore, if you're most talented players are receivers (TEs or WRs) your QB must be adequate enough to get them the ball.

I was kind of making a joke with that point to Gr00vus, hence the .But I'll take up this argument, because it's an easy one to argue. You don't win building around franchise WR's. You have a solid running game, and a solid QB, suddenly average WR's look great.

You take Calvin Johnson if you are sure that Quinn, Russell and Peterson are going to be busts.

I know you're not saying that Calvin should be the pick, but you kind of keep arguing for it. I am saying that Calvin should absolutely not be the pick. With that QB play, RB play, and O-line play last year, we're gonna take a WR? Really? no thanks.

OK. I'll take up the argument for Calvin.Say the Raiders are "stuck" with the #1 pick; can't trade down. They aren't sold on any of the QBs, and still like Jordan. They (might) see Calvin Johnson as a once in a decade WR talent; skill, polish, size, speed. At #1, a position that they hope they will not pick at often, how can they pass on what they (potentially) see as, by far, the best talent in this draft if not the past few?

Sure, he won't win the Raiders a Superbowl single-handedly, but he could force a defense to change their scheme and open up the entire offense. Not to mention that his character and work ethic may be what the Raiders need to chance their "cooperate culture."

In the rest of the draft, grab some OL, and give Walter a shot with a decent offensive scheme and a stud to work with at WR.

If I was a Raider fan, I'd be OK with that.

Having said all that, I might take Joe Thomas at #1.

 

[rascal]

If they were smart they would trade down and get more picks. Assuming Moss leaves they need help at WR, QB, O-line, and LB.

They might get lucky at get two or possibly three of those fixed with the draft. Problem is that their d-line is also getting old.

But if they choose to stay with their pick, or can't trade it I say they get CJ.

 

[Gr00vus]

That's what it comes down to, bro. You believe that neither Quinn nor Russell are franchise QB's. I'm not so sure.And I don't believe teams make picks in a vacuum. You can't just go BPA. At certain points you do, but at #1?What if the top rated player is a TE? Or a safety?

I hear you. If the top rated player was a TE or a Safety you'd have to consider it - how often has that happened? Again it would indicate that you've got quite a talent on your hands. I'd find it very hard to overlook. But I completely understand your point.I'm not so sure Quinn or Russell are not franchise QB's, but I'm more convinced that they're not FRANCHISE QB's. I don't see a Peyton Manning or a Tom Brady or a Dan Marino there. If it looked like that then hell yeah you take that guy and don't look back. Johnson and maybe Peterson I think could be FRANCHISE players - face of the team, perennial pro-bowler, possibly superstar/1st team All-Pro, outside chance at HOF to a much greater extent than the QBs. I think if you have an opportunity to land a guy like that you take it and let the rest work itself out.Here's a fun scenario:You take Johnson, offer a ham sammich and one of the malcontents, probably Porter to TB for Plummer (contingent on him not retiring and - thereby sticking it to BOTH TB and the Broncos in the process) let Walter and Plummer battle it out for the starting job - reassess at the end of the season whether you need another QB which I think you'll find at or above the same level as the guys you could draft this year should you need one at that point. To put the cherry on top, if Jordan indeed sucks it again, you sign Michael Turner as an UFA next year, thereby also sticking it to the Chargers.Good times, no?

 

[massraider]

If they were smart they would trade down and get more picks.

I'm with ya. Gotta find a partner, though. Who's the one guy worth trading up for? Calvin Johnson?

 

[massraider]

That's what it comes down to, bro. You believe that neither Quinn nor Russell are franchise QB's. I'm not so sure.And I don't believe teams make picks in a vacuum. You can't just go BPA. At certain points you do, but at #1?What if the top rated player is a TE? Or a safety?

I hear you. If the top rated player was a TE or a Safety you'd have to consider it - how often has that happened? Again it would indicate that you've got quite a talent on your hands. I'd find it very hard to overlook. But I completely understand your point.I'm not so sure Quinn or Russell are not franchise QB's, but I'm more convinced that they're not FRANCHISE QB's. I don't see a Peyton Manning or a Tom Brady or a Dan Marino there. If it looked like that then hell yeah you take that guy and don't look back. Johnson and maybe Peterson I think could be FRANCHISE players - face of the team, perennial pro-bowler, possibly superstar/1st team All-Pro, outside chance at HOF to a much greater extent than the QBs. I think if you have an opportunity to land a guy like that you take it and let the rest work itself out.Here's a fun scenario:You take Johnson, offer a ham sammich and one of the malcontents, probably Porter to TB for Plummer (contingent on him not retiring and - thereby sticking it to BOTH TB and the Broncos in the process) let Walter and Plummer battle it out for the starting job - reassess at the end of the season whether you need another QB which I think you'll find at or above the same level as the guys you could draft this year should you need one at that point. To put the cherry on top, if Jordan indeed sucks it again, you sign Michael Turner as an UFA next year, thereby also sticking it to the Chargers.Good times, no?

Moss is the guy to get traded. Porter is on board with the new staff, doesn't have a unfriendly contract, and has always been perceived as a Davis favorite. He's staying, for better or worse. He's not a #1, but a decent #2. He'll never be a favorite of mine, but he's one of those guys that probably has more value to the Raiders than anywhere else. Because if teams start trying to decide what his trade value is, they'll see a guy who hasn't gotten along with Gruden, Shell, and Belitnikoff, has a checkered injury history, and pretty much thinks he's better than he is. Not sure how much I'd give up for a guy like that. He's playing good soldier for now, so we'll see.Regarding Turner, or whoever, there's a million ways to skin a cat. There's backs all over the place. The NFL is littered with them. Right now, there's more backs han starting jobs, and we have AD and Lynch about to enter the draft. A bunch of different scenarios could help them at RB. I was never on the AD bandwagon, and I never really thought he was a consideration at #1. Re-working Jordan confirms that, in my mind.Regarding the QB's next year. I dunno, but are any of them as highly thought of as Quinn was after last year? If anyone was doing a mock draft after last season, they were penciling Quinn in at #1, right? Is Brohm (or whoever) a better prospect?

 

[Whiplash Inc.]

If they decide neither QB is worth #1 money, they should trade down a few spots (Tampa maybe?) and go with Adrian Peterson.

We have a good young defense and a solid ground game would go along ways in getting this franchise back to .500 and above.

With the picks from the trade you either move back into the first round for top offenive lineman or stay put and still address the Offensive Line.

I think a guy like peterson will make a bigger impact for us than Calvin Johnson (even though he's all world talent). If they don't trade randy Moss we still have more than adequate receivers with Porter, Curry, Gabriel and Moss.

 

[chris1969]

Am I the only one to think Jordan is an idiot for restructuring? He coulda got better money by getting cut.

 

[zamboni]

Am I the only one to think Jordan is an idiot for restructuring? He coulda got better money by getting cut.

I disagree. Jordan would have found himself mired in a deep pool of other RBs (e.g., Lewis, Brown, Rhodes) that have as much, if not more, value than Jordan at this juncture. And the number of teams looking for starters continues to dwindle.He's lucky to get another shot with the team - restructuring and still getting great coin was the only plausible move for Jordan.