Raiderfan32904
Footballguy
Let's get it started.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was hoping to hold off for a round of playoffs or two before we started the offseason thread.Let's get it started.
Fantastic post.I think #7 is the key, along with the second sentence of #2. The difference between staying disciplined and focused -- for all four quarters of the game -- is the difference between a middling 8-8 and a division-winning or wildcard berth 11-5 season.1. Fire Bresnahan. Bring in a young, innovative DC that wants to be a HC down the road. It should be an attractive job for a DC. Lots of talent, that has been wasted in a boring, rudimentary defense. Let Hue handpick a DC, then leave him alone. Man, zone, cover-2, zone blitz, 3-4, be nice to mix it up. BAL Ravens are the model here.
2. Let the team know that they will be in better shape next year. Injuries and penalties can both potentially be a result of fatigue. Word has been for a long time that you can wear the Raiders down, as they tend to lack stamina. This team is plenty young, no reason not to have a rough camp next July. Get everyone healthy, and get them IN SHAPE. Man, we just had a million injuries that dragged out. DMC, yeah. But that was just tip of the iceberg. Huff? Starting FS. We missed him, a lot. We saw way too much of Giordano this year. Ford? Second best WR. Missed over half the season, no? Lou Murphy? All of training camp. Starting CB Chris Johnson. Starting FB Marcel Reece. Best WR Denarius Moore. Our Starting TE. Our starting RE, Shaugnessy.
3. Competition at RG and RT. Can Barksdale beat out Barnes? And Bruce Cambell especially. Two years to mature, not either make a move, or beat it.
4. Competition at CB. C. Johnson is older, and probably done. Sheppard is no long term answer. Bring in a vet, and let Chekwa and DVD play nickel and dime.
5. Another TE. I like Boss, but couldn't care less about his backups. And I like Boss, I don't love him. Maybe Seattle will trade Miller back to us, they aren't using him.
6. Give M. Bush a nice offer. He won't take it, if he can get a lead dog role somewhere, but try and keep him. There's no need to pay him starter money. You cannot afford to, as there are a million backs out there. I doubt that he returns, but it's possible.
7. Figure out how to close teams out. We had more than one team on the ropes, and couldn't close the door. BUFF the big one. DET another.
No it didnt. The only thing that would affect the 2013 pick in the Palmer deal is if Oakland goes to an AFC championship game before then... including next season's playoffs. Simply making or missing the playoffs has no affect. Its still a 1st in 2012 and conditional 2nd in 2013.Focus on the positive; missing the playoffs reduced the cost of Carson Palmer!With the Palmer deal in place, not much in the way of draft picks, you have to try to make a deep playoff run in 2012 with Palmer at QB. They probably can't get real value for any of the other QBs on the roster, so they keep Campbell as a backup or release him for salary savings. WR corps is looking better. RB is solid if McFadden can come back healthy. Probably look at one or two big-ticket FA acquisitions on defense and in the OL.
Odds and ends from Sunday’s game
By Steve Corkran
Sunday, January 1st, 2012 at 8:29 pm in Oakland Raiders.
The Raiders blew away the all-time records for penalties and penalty yards on the strength of eight for 64 yards Sunday in a 38-26 loss to the San Diego Chargers.
The Raiders finished with 163 penalties for 1,358 yards, eclispsing the 158 for 1,304 posted by the 1998 Kansas City Chiefs.
2012 SCHEDULE
The Raiders finished tied with the Chargers and Denver Broncos at 8-8 in the AFC West. However, for scheduling purposes they are considered the third-place team by virtue of tiebreakers.
Therefore, the Raiders play the third-place teams in the AFC South and the AFC East, with the Jacksonville Jaguars coming to Oakland and the Raiders playing the Miami Dolphins on the road.
The Raiders also play the four AFC North teams and the four NFC South teams as part of the regular rotation. Their six other games are against the three AFC West foes.
WHAT’S IN A NUMBER?
The Raiders posted an undefeated mark in divisional games away from the Coliseum for the second straight season. On the downside, the Raiders lost all three of their games against AFC West teams at home this season.
BUSH, HEYWARD-BEY NOT SO GRAND
Running back Michael Bush and wide receiver Darrius Heyward-Bey came up just shy of notching 1,000 yards for the first time in their respective NFL careers.
Bush rushed for 66 yards Sunday and finished the season with 977. Not bad for a player who started the season as a seldom-used backup to Darren McFadden.
Heyward-Bey caught nine of the 17 passes thrown his way Sunday for 130 yards. He finished the season with 64 receptions for 975 yards and four touchdowns in his breakout season.
The Raiders still haven’t had a 1,000-yard receiver since 2005, when Randy Moss tallied 1,005.
GIORDANO PICKS OFF TITLE
Safety Matt Giordano’s first-quarter interception marked his fifth of the season. It snapped a tie he held with cornerback Stanford Routt and held up as the team-high for 2011.
The Raiders won all four games in which Giordano had an interception before Sunday’s break from routine.
SACKLESS DAY
Philip Rivers attempted 26 passes Sunday without being sacked. Heck, he didn’t get hit much, either.
The sackless effort means that defensive tackle Tommy Kelly gets the sack title for the Raiders this season. He finished with 7 1/2.
PALMER’S MIXED BAG
Carson Palmer passed for 417 yards and two touchdowns Sunday. He also was intercepted once. Overall, he finished with 13 touchdown passes and 16 interceptions this season.
The 417 yards is the third most in Raiders history. Jeff Hostetler passed for 424 on Oct. 31, 1993 and Cotton Davidson had 419 on Oct. 25, 1964.
EXTRA POINTS
*The Raiders allowed 153 yards rushing Sunday. For the season, they allowed an average of 136.1 yards per game.
*Rookie wide receiver Denarius Moore’s 78-yard reception in the third quarter resulted in the longest reception of any Raiders player this season. His 61-yarder against the Chiefs last Sunday had been the standard bearer.
*Tight end Kevin Boss suffered a concussion at the end of his 22-yard touchdown reception in the fourth quarter.
*Shane Lechler’s 58-yard punt was the only punt of the game.
Follow me on Twitter: @corkonthenfl
I completely disagree with PFT's poorly-written hatchet job of Hue. The Raiders always been a players-first organization. To a fault. And Hue is right. Hey, Hue Jackson and Bres didn't tell the D-line to never get any pressure yesterday. They didn't tell every single blitzer to run into the backfield, looking for a blocker to stick to. They didn't tell Seymour to jump offside, or Khalif Barnes to get caught holding. The HC takes responsibility for every action? Look, the buck stops there, for sure. But there are problems with the players that were out there yesterday. Mostly the defense. And a lot of it was Bresnahan's fault. But a lot of it were players that were standing around, waiting for someone else to make a play. I have zero problem with Hue calling out the players. Funny part is, from the article that that donkey ###-clown Rosenthal quoted, Michael Huff agrees with Hue:Hue Jackson is “pissed” at team, wants more powerPosted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 2, 2012, 10:44 AM ESTOakland Raiders v Green Bay Packers Getty ImagesRaiders coach Hue Jackson didn’t take Oakland’s latest defensive collapse well.While he occasionally made a weak effort to take responsibility for his team’s loss, Jackson generally threw his team under the bus in a manner you don’t normally see from head coaches.“I’m pissed at my team,” Jackson said after the game via the Oakland Tribune. “At some point in time, as a group of men, you go in the game, and you can say whatever you want about coaches, you win the game. Here’s your time. Here’s your time to make plays.“We didn’t get ‘em stopped. And we didn’t make enough plays. So, yeah, I’m pissed at the team. I’m also, like I tell them, I’ll always put it on me, but I am pissed at my team. Because when you have those kinds of opportunities, you’ve got to do it, and we didn’t do it.”Translation: I’ll always put it on me, except when I totally put it on you guys.Jackson seems especially upset with his defense. (For good reason.) We wouldn’t expect to see defensive coordinator Chuck Bresnahan back next year.“Chuck knows how I feel,” Jackson said. “I’m disappointed over there. I have been. It’s not like we haven’t had conversations. Chuck knows what I feel, and it’s not good enough. . . . When you play defense in the NFL, man, you got to hunt. You can’t give up 28, 29 points and expect to win.”Translation: That’s Bresnahan’s defense. Got it?Jackson’s solution for all the problems: More Hue Jackson.“I’m going take a stronger hand in this whole team, this whole organization,” Jackson said. “There ain’t no way that I’m going to feel like I feel today a year from now, I promise you that. There’s no question. Defensively, offensively and special teams. I aint feeling like this no more. This is a joke. . . . Yeah, I’m going to take a hand in everything that goes on here.”Translation: I haven’t fully considered all the implications of what could happen when the Raiders hire a personnel man to be my boss.
Free safety Michael Huff said he appreciates Jackson’s dour mood. However, the blame falls upon the players and not Jackson or defensive coordinator Chuck Bresnahan.“We should all be pissed,” Huff said. “To be this close and to blow it, it’s nothing the coaches did. The players didn’t play (well). I know some people are going to try to blame Chuck, some people are going to try to blame Hue but, at the end of the day, we’re the ones on the field.“Regardless of the defense that’s called, we got to line up and play and execute. I don’t want anybody going out there and trying to blame the coaches because it’s on us.”
Raiders interviewing GM candidate todayBy Steve CorkranWednesday, January 4th, 2012 at 11:21 am in Oakland Raiders.Raiders owner Mark Davis isn’t wasting any time in finding a general manager to fill the power vacuum created by the death of his father in early October.Davis reportedly intends to interview Green Bay Packers director of football operations Reggie McKenzie today, according to the Chicago Sun Times.McKenzie was hired by Ron Wolf in 1994 as a pro scout, and he has worked his way up over the past 18 years. Wolf once worked for the Raiders under Al Davis. He is advising Mark Davis on football matters in the interim, along with former Raiders coach John Madden and former Raiders personnel man Ken Herock.Late last year, Wolf issued a glowing recommendation of McKenzie as a general manager candidate.“Reggie’s a tremendous evaluator,” McKenzie told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. “He can tell you who can play and who can’t play. That’s what it’s all about. Some can write reports but can’t tell you who can play. Whatever that is, he has that. He has a feel.”McKenzie, 48, played in the NFL for seven seasons, including four for the Los Angeles Raiders from 1985-88.League rules stipulate that McKenzie can be interviewed but not hired until the Packers are done playing this season. Therefore, Davis might have to wait until early February before hiring McKenzie, who is considered the front-runner.There also is speculation that McKenzie might bring along Eliot Wolf, Ron Wolf’s son, if he gets hired by the Raiders. The younger Wolf is an assistant director of player personnel for the Packers.Raiders coach Hue Jackson said in a radio interview Tuesday night that he is looking forward to working with a general manager who thinks along his lines.“I really want to work on conjunction with someone who shares the same vision,” Jackson said on NFL Sirius radio. “I know whoever Mark decides to bring in to the organization will have the same vision because my vision is winning, and winning championships.“I don’t have any other vision or any other ego. My whole thing is about winning and whatever it takes to win. Do I want to make sure I have an idea and have some input on who I put on a team? Yes. But at the end of the day, if the chain of command starts with the GM when it comes to those decisions, I’m fine with that, too.”A Raiders official told beat writer Jerry McDonald earlier this morning that he didn’t have any comment on the Sun Times report.Follow me on Twitter: @corkonthenfl
I hope we get Mckenzie as well. He sounds like he would make a great GM. Maybe if we are lucky Mckenzie will bring Winston Moss with him also to be our Defensive Coordinator.I hope we get Mckenzie.The Raiders only have a 5th and 6th round pick right now. They should get one 3rd round compensatory pick and one or two late picks but those wont be awarded until close to the draft.
We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
UnknownCoach I don't think Counter Pass is saying we should go into training camp with just 4 wr's. What he is saying is that we have bigger needs then WR to spend what few draft picks we have on one. We can find decently priced veteran free agent WR's for training camp bodies. I disagree with you by the way, you can find real good players late in the draft if a team does it's homework. Denarius Moore for example. Granted it won't happen every year but its not impossible either.We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
Well, I most definately disagree. We have 2 FA WRs, one is old and the other is broken. The need to replace them is just as much if not more than most of our other FAs.UnknownCoach I don't think Counter Pass is saying we should go into training camp with just 4 wr's. What he is saying is that we have bigger needs then WR to spend what few draft picks we have on one. We can find decently priced veteran free agent WR's for training camp bodies. I disagree with you by the way, you can find real good players late in the draft if a team does it's homework. Denarius Moore for example. Granted it won't happen every year but its not impossible either.We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
So your telling me that our resources are better spent adding more young WR's via the draft then upgrading our LB depth (Blackstock was horrible filling in for McClain) or adding better depth to our Safety positions (Huff is converting over to a CB). In this case we will have to agree to disagree then.Well, I most definately disagree. We have 2 FA WRs, one is old and the other is broken. The need to replace them is just as much if not more than most of our other FAs.UnknownCoach I don't think Counter Pass is saying we should go into training camp with just 4 wr's. What he is saying is that we have bigger needs then WR to spend what few draft picks we have on one. We can find decently priced veteran free agent WR's for training camp bodies. I disagree with you by the way, you can find real good players late in the draft if a team does it's homework. Denarius Moore for example. Granted it won't happen every year but its not impossible either.We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
What I'm telling you is that late round draft picks only add depth. If you want a starter you pick him in the early rounds or sign a FA. Like I said at the very beginning, we need to add a starter quality safety and linebacker. You dont spend a late draft pick for a starter quality player. Again, like I said way in the beginning, we will be spending our few draft picks replacing some of those FA depth players I named. Like I said from the start, we need to look hard at a free agent safety, linebacker, corner, and possibly defensive tackle. I'm sorry if you want to feel that our team is going to get better in next year's draft, it isnt. All we can do with our draft is replace some of the free agent backup players who will be gone. I'm saying that Schilens and Housmanzadah are two of our FAs that we can most easily afford to let walk.So your telling me that our resources are better spent adding more young WR's via the draft then upgrading our LB depth (Blackstock was horrible filling in for McClain) or adding better depth to our Safety positions (Huff is converting over to a CB). In this case we will have to agree to disagree then.Well, I most definately disagree. We have 2 FA WRs, one is old and the other is broken. The need to replace them is just as much if not more than most of our other FAs.UnknownCoach I don't think Counter Pass is saying we should go into training camp with just 4 wr's. What he is saying is that we have bigger needs then WR to spend what few draft picks we have on one. We can find decently priced veteran free agent WR's for training camp bodies. I disagree with you by the way, you can find real good players late in the draft if a team does it's homework. Denarius Moore for example. Granted it won't happen every year but its not impossible either.We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
I always do a doubletake at players that have a connection with our coaching staff, so you have to wonder about Grubbs getting a call from Hue. I would love to get Nicks as well. Rest of the OT:2012 NFL Free Agent Offensive Linemen
By: Roshan Bhagat
Demetrius Bell (BUF) - OT - Bell is another under-the-radar player capable of protecting the blindside and is a vital piece to the Bills' offense with an expiring contract. Though he's an above average pass protector, he's an even better run blocker for the left side. The Bills have some work to be done to keep all of the pieces together, which could allow Bell to slip through the cracks into free agency.
Carl Nicks (NO) - OG - Nicks is one of the premier guards in the league and after watching Jahri Evans strike a rich deal not too long ago, the Saints may be hard pressed to offer a second guard that type of money, though Nicks arguably had a better season a year ago. If Nicks doesn't put a hometown discount on the table, there's a good chance the market shows him more love than the Saints can afford to show him.
Ben Grubbs (BAL) - OG - Grubbs has been one of the top offensive linemen on one of the better units in the league over the past few years. Despite having some moving pieces next to him at left tackle, Grubbs has continued to excel. The team's run game is at its best with him blocking on the move. With some instability along the offensive line over the past few years, it wouldn't be surprising to see the Ravens address Grubbs' contract immediately.
Chris Myers (HOU) - OC - Myers has found himself in one of the best possible situations in the league with the Texans. After years of searching, the Texans have been able to replicate some of the success Head Coach Gary Kubiak had in Denver. Meyers is an outstanding system fit and will probably stay in Houston.
Jeff Saturday (IND) - OC - Though the Colts have bigger priorities, Saturday has been a Colt for a long time. With his career on winding down, he may want to stay put for a shot at another ring with Manning likely to return at full health next year.
Nick Hardwick (SD) - OC - Hardwick isn't nearly at his Pro Bowl level from several years back, but he's a solid center with good size, strength, and football IQ. The Chargers have some other contracts to address before they get to Hardwick, which would allow a team desperate in the middle to steal him from San Diego while searching for his Pro Bowl years yet again.
Scott Wells (GB) - OC - Like Meyers, Wells is an ideal system fit. The Packers have sought to get bigger and stronger at the position over the Thompson's tenure, but there's no doubt that Wells has consistently outperformed all others. He's a heady center with no flash that could play well into his 30s. Though the Packers won't offer a lucrative deal, he's also unlikely to find that elsewhere as an undersized center.
The Rest:
D'Anthony Batiste (ARZ) - OT
Levi Brown (ARZ) - OT
Brandon Keith (ARZ) - OT
Mark LeVoir (BAL) - OT
Demetrius Bell (BUF) - OT
Erik Pears (BUF) - OT
Anthony Collins (CIN) - OT
Dennis Roland (CIN) - OT
Oniel Cousins (CLE) - OT
Artis Hicks (CLE) - OT
Guy Whimper (JAC) - OT
Jared Gaither (KC) - OT
Barry Richardson (KC) - OT
Vernon Carey (MIA) - OT
Kareem McKenzie (NYG) - OT
Robert Turner (NYJ) - OT
Khalif Barnes (OAK) - OT
Stephon Heyer (OAK) - OT
King Dunlap (PHI) - OT
Trai Essex (PIT) - OT
Max Starks (PIT) - OT
Breno Giacomini (SEA) - OT
Adam Snyder (SF) - OT
Adam Goldberg (STL) - OT
James Lee (TB) - OT
Mike Otto (TEN) - OT
C.J. Davis (CAR) - OT - Exclusive Rights
Geoff Schwartz (CAR) - OT - Restricted
Garry Williams (CAR) - OT - Restricted
Jermey Parnell (DAL) - OT - Exclusive Rights
Chris Clark (DEN) - OT - Exclusive Rights
Corey Hilliard (DET) - OT - Restricted
Lydon Murtha (MIA) - OT - Restricted
Patrick Brown (MIN) - OT - Exclusive Rights
Brandyn Dombrowski (SD) - OT - Restricted
Alex Boone (SF) - OT - Exclusive Rights
Remember we are getting a new GM and likely a new DC. That greatly increases the chance of bringing in a linebacker to at least compete with Wimbley if not out right replace him. Far easier for me to say it than the Raiders to do it though.You can always tell where the needs are by which positions you instinctively click on. I went DB and OT. Linebacker is interesting, because I personally doubt we make a move next year. I think we stay with Kam, Ro, and Curry. I am not saying that's what we should do, it's what I think we will do. I'd rather have Kam playing DE, and find another LB, but that ain't gonna happen.
I agree with you on McClain. I think he would be better suited in a 3-4 defense. I hope we can get an innovative defensive coach and switch schemes up. I'm also a big fan of Checkwa, I was impressed with him before he got injured.I tend to agree that our defense is what needs to be upgraded more than the O. But to be fair, we had a ton of injuries and guys like Blackstock are not supposed to have starting roles on any NFL roster. Our starting defense (when healthy) is actually a strength. And who knows what it could have been if we didn't have to backfill starting jobs with guys out of position. I think we will look back on our 2011 draft and we may have found our starting CB of the future in either Chimdi Checkwa or DVD. (I am in the Checkwa camp, but I would be pleased if both emerged). Our front seven (again assuming health) are a strong unit. You can't emphasize enough the loss of Shaughnessy at RDE. I think McClain will never be what we were all expecting from the consensus top LB of the draft a couple of years ago. He lacks the speed and instincts to man his position in the 4-3 alignment. Maybe they decide to switch to a 3-4 or even mix it up. Regardless, a new DC is required, and Bresh needs to go. I wish we still had Marshall, but again that attack defense was predicated on what Nnamdi could do shutting down half of the field. It's a different group of personnel, and we need a new DC. An NFL one, not a UFL one. We also don't need UFL quality backups. If we draft for need, we could sure use some depth on the defensive side.
Now your just being silly. I never once said that we can use this years upcoming draft to make drastic improvements to our team. It's not going to happen with no 1st or 2nd round picks. The most dramatic provements will have to be made via free agency and/or trade. All I'm saying is I think our draft can be better spent working on defensive depth and some offensive line depth. Barnes has to go he is a penalty waiting to happen.What I'm telling you is that late round draft picks only add depth. If you want a starter you pick him in the early rounds or sign a FA. Like I said at the very beginning, we need to add a starter quality safety and linebacker. You dont spend a late draft pick for a starter quality player. Again, like I said way in the beginning, we will be spending our few draft picks replacing some of those FA depth players I named. Like I said from the start, we need to look hard at a free agent safety, linebacker, corner, and possibly defensive tackle. I'm sorry if you want to feel that our team is going to get better in next year's draft, it isnt. All we can do with our draft is replace some of the free agent backup players who will be gone. I'm saying that Schilens and Housmanzadah are two of our FAs that we can most easily afford to let walk.So your telling me that our resources are better spent adding more young WR's via the draft then upgrading our LB depth (Blackstock was horrible filling in for McClain) or adding better depth to our Safety positions (Huff is converting over to a CB). In this case we will have to agree to disagree then.Well, I most definately disagree. We have 2 FA WRs, one is old and the other is broken. The need to replace them is just as much if not more than most of our other FAs.UnknownCoach I don't think Counter Pass is saying we should go into training camp with just 4 wr's. What he is saying is that we have bigger needs then WR to spend what few draft picks we have on one. We can find decently priced veteran free agent WR's for training camp bodies. I disagree with you by the way, you can find real good players late in the draft if a team does it's homework. Denarius Moore for example. Granted it won't happen every year but its not impossible either.We need a lot more than 4 WRs going into training camp. Late round draft picks add quantity not quality. We'll be lucky if we can get even one difference maker in next year's draft. If Bush leaves, that is where I'd spend the top pick.'32 Counter Pass said:When you own as few draft picks as the Raiders the last thing you should be considering is honoring Davis with a later round WR pick.I just do not see it as a position of need either. They four 4 decent prospects in Moore, Ford, DHB, and Murphy. Get stronger on the lines and the back end of the defense.
True that. Mike Silver just tweeted that Bres IS getting fired, I think this is about as much a secret at Hue getting hired. I always thought Kam as a LB in a 4-3 didn't make sense. You can get by with him, but eventually, you are asking him to cover someone man-to-man, and that cannot end well. I just always thought having a rotation at DE, with him, O'Shucks, and Houston made sense (rotate Houston inside on passing downs, he's a terror rushing inside).Remember we are getting a new GM and likely a new DC. That greatly increases the chance of bringing in a linebacker to at least compete with Wimbley if not out right replace him. Far easier for me to say it than the Raiders to do it though.You can always tell where the needs are by which positions you instinctively click on. I went DB and OT. Linebacker is interesting, because I personally doubt we make a move next year. I think we stay with Kam, Ro, and Curry. I am not saying that's what we should do, it's what I think we will do. I'd rather have Kam playing DE, and find another LB, but that ain't gonna happen.
Whatever. You can argue what to do with the late round picks all you want. Last year we took Jones, Gordan, and Ausberry. Players with potential, not players we needed. I dont see any reason to be concerned with big needs at that point in the draft but if that's your thing, whatever.Now your just being silly. I never once said that we can use this years upcoming draft to make drastic improvements to our team. It's not going to happen with no 1st or 2nd round picks. The most dramatic provements will have to be made via free agency and/or trade. All I'm saying is I think our draft can be better spent working on defensive depth and some offensive line depth. Barnes has to go he is a penalty waiting to happen.
I haven't seen that yet. The latest is that Bres and 3 other coaches are finishing out the last two weeks of their contract. Whatever. I can't get worked up about anyone except Bres, who I want gone, and never should have come back. People will get upset if Woodson goes, but who knows if he was a good coach or not? I don't.Just heard on the radio that every defensive coach on the staff except the d-line coach was fired today.
The radio host that said it was from a San Diego sports station....his nickname is hacksaw...not sure how reliable his sources are so take it for what it's worth.I haven't seen that yet. The latest is that Bres and 3 other coaches are finishing out the last two weeks of their contract. Whatever. I can't get worked up about anyone except Bres, who I want gone, and never should have come back. People will get upset if Woodson goes, but who knows if he was a good coach or not? I don't.Just heard on the radio that every defensive coach on the staff except the d-line coach was fired today.
I used to listen to Hacksaw many years ago. The station might actually be closer to LA but I'm not sure. He sometimes makes a bold prediction on his own but he's been around a long time. Used to be the "voice of the Chargers", not sure if he still is. The station itself is well connected to California teams and did break a lot of early news. With Lee "Hacksaw" Hamilton it seems to be a pride thing though, he likes to be the first to report something. Its usually true but not always.The radio host that said it was from a San Diego sports station....his nickname is hacksaw...not sure how reliable his sources are so take it for what it's worth.
It depends on the contract he signs, and if we sign a player of a similar or bigger deal. If Bush gets anything approaching starter salary, he would easily be worth a 4th round comp pick. The question then becomes, did we sign a FA of an equal value?Its a big FA class because of new CBA and holdout.Any compensatory pick for Bush would depend on any free agents we sign. Which means we might not get any, very unlikely a 4th.
The way I understand it, a lesser FA still works against the value of the pick as long as that FA meets the minimum qualification. If Bush has the value of a 4th and we sign the value of a 5th, the difference might only be the value of a 7th. That's the way it sounds to me when I read into it.It depends on the contract he signs, and if we sign a player of a similar or bigger deal. If Bush gets anything approaching starter salary, he would easily be worth a 4th round comp pick. The question then becomes, did we sign a FA of an equal value?Its a big FA class because of new CBA and holdout.Any compensatory pick for Bush would depend on any free agents we sign. Which means we might not get any, very unlikely a 4th.
I truly cannot remember, but this is a re-post of AdamJT13, from 2009, I think:The way I understand it, a lesser FA still works against the value of the pick as long as that FA meets the minimum qualification. If Bush has the value of a 4th and we sign the value of a 5th, the difference might only be the value of a 7th. That's the way it sounds to me when I read into it.
I have followed this in a very casual manner for years, and going by per-year averages, we lost 3 big ticket guys (Nnamdi, Gallery, Miller) and Boss was our biggest FA, as far as I can recall. And his numbers weren't close to any of those players. I think there is a good chance we get a 3 and two 4's, worst case a 3,4,5. Just my guess.For the eighth consecutive year and ninth overall, I’ve attempted to project all of the compensatory draft picks that the NFL will award. In my past seven projections, I’ve averaged 23.9 out of 32 exactly correct (going to the correct team in the correct round) and have been off by only one round on an average of 4.1 more. Last year, I got 25 correct and was off by one round on four more. With this year’s projections, I’m hoping to get a combined score of at least 30, although it’s possible that more than the usual number of them could be off by one round because so many projected compensatory picks fell near the cutoff points between rounds.As the NFL explains, compensatory picks are awarded to teams that lose more or better compensatory free agents than they acquire. The number of picks a team can receive equals the net loss of compensatory free agents, up to a maximum of four. Compensatory free agents are determined by a secret formula based on salary, playing time and postseason honors. Not every free agent lost or signed is covered by the formula.Although the formula has never been revealed, by studying the compensatory picks that have been awarded since they began in 1994, I’ve determined that the primary factor in the value of the picks awarded is the average annual value of the contract the player signed with his new team, with an adjustment for playing time and a smaller adjustment for postseason honors. It should be noted that the contract values used in the equation seemingly do not include things such as workout bonuses, incentives and conditional bonuses. (Also, keep in mind that the contract figures reported in the media often are incorrect.) And the playing time used in the equation seemingly is the percentage of offensive or defensive snaps played.A simple method of determining for which qualifying free agents a team will be compensated is this – for every player acquired, cancel out a lost player of similar value. For example, consider a team that loses one qualifying player whose value would bring a third-round comp pick and another qualifying player whose value would bring a sixth-round comp pick but signs a qualifying player whose value would be in the range of a third-round pick. That team would receive a sixth-round comp pick because the signed player would cancel out the loss of the higher-valued player. If the signed player’s value was equal to a fourth-round pick or lower, however, the team would receive a third-round comp pick, because the signed player would cancel out the loss of the lower-valued player.It is possible for a team to get a compensatory pick even if it doesn’t suffer a net loss of qualifying free agents. That type of comp pick comes at the end of the seventh round, after the normal comp picks and before the non-compensatory picks that are added if fewer than 32 comp picks are awarded. There have been 13 of these “net value” type of comp picks awarded, and in each case, the combined value of the free agents lost was significantly higher than the combined value of the free agents added. In all 13 cases, those teams lost the same number of qualifying free agents as they signed. No team has been awarded a comp pick after signing more qualifying free agents than it lost, no matter how significant the difference in combined value. This year, I’m projecting that Detroit and Arizona will receive a net-value comp picks. Detroit lost three qualifying players (Damien Woody, Boss Bailey and T.J. Duckett) and signed three qualifying players (Brian Kelly, Michael Gaines and Chuck Darby). Arizona lost three (Calvin Pace, Bryant Johnson and Keydrick Vincent) and signed three (Travis LaBoy, Clark Haggans and Bryan Robinson). The combined values of the players Detroit and Arizona lost each exceeded 50 percent more than the combined values of the players they signed. That would be the smallest difference in value of any net-value comp in the past six years, but I’m projecting that it will be enough for both teams.For the second consecutive year, I’ve used a mathematical formula to weight the three factors that determine a player’s value in the comp equation (his contract, his playing time and his postseason awards). Using this formula, I’ve been able to reconstruct almost precisely the order of the comp picks that were awarded in 2006, 2007 and 2008. In two of those years, the only difference between the reconstructed order and the actual order was that a very small difference in values had the order of two consecutive picks switched. I don’t know if I have the factors weighted correctly, but given that my projected order last year (not the reconstructed order after the actual comps were awarded) matched the exact order of the comp picks in many cases – including one instance of 11 straight, out of the projected picks I had correct – I think I’m probably pretty close.As always, please note that my comp pick formula is merely an attempt to project the results of the actual (secret) formula. I don’t pretend to know the actual formula. But I think previous results indicate that the formula I use is a pretty good simulation.In order to qualify for the comp equation, a player must have been a true Unrestricted Free Agent whose contract had expired or was voided after the previous season (i.e., he cannot have been released by his old team); he must sign during the UFA signing period (which ended July 22 last year); if he signs after June 1, he must have been tendered a June 1 qualifying offer by his old team; his compensatory value must be above a specific minimum amount; and he cannot have been permanently released by his new team before a certain point in the season (which seems to be after Week 10) or, possibly, before getting a certain amount of playing time, unless he was claimed off waivers by another team.The most difficult part about projecting the comp picks is determining all of the cutoff points – the minimum value needed to qualify and the value ranges for the comp picks in each round of the draft. The comp picks awarded in previous years suggest that the cutoff points increase each year by a small percentage – approximately the same percentage by which the leaguewide salary cap increases. From 2007 to 2008, the cap went up 6.96 percent, so I used a 7 percent increase when estimating the cutoff points for this year’s comp picks.
I tried to do something like this before in the old thread.There are 5 FAs lost and signed likely to meet the minimum value requirement. Asomugha, Miller, Gallery, Boss, and Heyer.I dont know what Gallery's contract is worth. Asomugha is around 12m, Miller around 7.5, Boss around 4, and Heyer around 1.8. Also factored in is playing time and offseason awards. None will get any offseason award. Miller, Gallery, and Boss all missed time with injuries but were starters when healthy. Heyer was inactive a couple games and didnt play much when he was active.What matters is how many qualifying FA we lost (3), how many we gained (2), and how much each is worth. I know we start with the net loss of 1 FA (3 lost - 2 gained). That means we get a minimum of one compensatory pick from my research. We will get an additional 1-2 picks because the value of the 2 other lost FAs is greater than the value of the 2 gained.What I do not know is how they start subtracting the value of the gains from the value of the losses. They could start with most simuliar value, at the top, at the bottum, or with a more complicated formula.If they start with simuliar value, Gallery and Boss could potentially be a wash which might leave us with only 2 picks, the one for Asomugha and one for the value of Miller - Heyer. If they start at the bottum or top we should end up with 3 picks but 2 of their values will drop. This is why its hard to guess what our picks will be. It could be something like a 3rd and 5th (starting subtracting from simuliar value) or something like 3rd, 6th, and 7th (starting at bottum values) or something like a 4th and two 5ths (starting at top values). It could be even more complicated. The actual formulas used to determine each player's value is kept secret by the NFL. We do know that higher compensatory picks are far rarer than later picks. This is what my earlier research tells me. Feel free to do your own though. Nobody seems to know for certain.So for the draft the Raiders have their own 5 & 6. I assume they will be awarded a 3rd round pick for NA. Do they also get compensatory picks for losing Gallery and Miller? They did sign Boss which might offset one, but they may be looking at another 4th for the other. Thoughts?