Who's benching Moss, even with Brooks now starting? (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

I can't believe it's come to this, but I'm considering starting Desmond Clark or Ben Watson over Moss. Having Brooks back should help Moss, but playing in such a hostile environment, and I'm not sure Randy won't be dropping passes again because he's "not foccused". How many of you in shark land benched Moss a long time ago? Obviously he's making a ploy for getting cut or traded in 2007.

Randy Moss has reiterated his desire to be out of Oakland in 2007.

The Raiders won't require a large cap hit to cut Moss, but it would be silly if they don't explore dealing him first. Moss is now attributing his lull in production to his timing with Oakland's quarterbacks.

Source: Contra Costa Times

 

[JohnnyU]

Playing like a dog isn't the way to get traded. What team in their right mind will deal for him knowing that he'll quit on THEM the minute the going gets tough? And don't hold your breath waiting for him to get cut, either. Big Al is a very spiteful person. See: Porter, Jerry. He'd rather pay someone to be a malcontent than release them just to make them happy. Al has all the money in the world, and he's gonna be dead in like 30 minutes anyway, so what's the difference?

Good point. However, since Al will be "dead in 30 minutes anyway", maybe Al wants to win before that 30 minutes is up? Believe it or not, Moss still has value to a lot of teams out there, and if the Raiders can improve their team in a trade they will IMO.

 

[V1LL]

Playing like a dog isn't the way to get traded. What team in their right mind will deal for him knowing that he'll quit on THEM the minute the going gets tough?

OOH, OOH, OOH....I know the answer to this one. The Oakland Raiders !!

 

[nflguru]

I can't believe it's come to this, but I'm considering starting Desmond Clark or Ben Watson over Moss. Having Brooks back should help Moss, but playing in such a hostile environment, and I'm not sure Randy won't be dropping passes again because he's "not foccused". How many of you in shark land benched Moss a long time ago? Obviously he's making a ploy for getting cut or traded in 2007.Randy Moss has reiterated his desire to be out of Oakland in 2007.The Raiders won't require a large cap hit to cut Moss, but it would be silly if they don't explore dealing him first. Moss is now attributing his lull in production to his timing with Oakland's quarterbacks.Source: Contra Costa Times

I started Ben Watson last week over him and they performed about the same... If Brooks returns it will be interesting to see how Moss is involved... However it turns out, major bust this season and he goes on the "will never draft again" list...

 

[The Big V]

I'm starting Branch over him

I thought randy would return to form this year and blew a 3rd round pick on him - damn

 

[MLBrandow]

He won't be traded but he will be cut.

 

[Tom Servo]

To the OP --

I have benched him since the bye weeks finished up. Of course, I have Housh, Roy Williams, and Isaac Bruce with TE Stevens...and it's a 16 team league.

Hope that helps.

 

[Megatron]

Starting D. Driver and L. Evans over Moss. Might even start J. Cotchery if SA can't go.

 

[Isotopes]

I am pulling the plug on Moss. He will now ride the bench to let Reche Caldwell have a shot.

 

[jdraiders]

I think the question is who in their right mind would start Moss after his stupidity this week. At this point, as a Raiders fan, I would rather have TO.......hell, for that matter I would rather have Marinovitch.....

 

[CrossEyed]

Thanks to the Portis injury I'm stuck playing Moss over Barlow in my flex spot. I sure hope Brooks chucks a few deep in Randy's direction.

 

[gman8343]

Playing Lee Evans over Moss in two leagues.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Playing Chris Henry over Moss in one league, playing Moss over Antonio Bryant in another. No rhyme or reason.

 

[softball]

Johnny U-great ?

I've been staring at numbers for an hour now trying to decide if I go for 1 more bite of the Randy moss Apple.

I have Deion Branch in over him in two leagues right now. But then I look at the numbers and see Randy was targeted 5 times and Deion 6 last week. So if they are even in that department why not keep taking the chance with RM?

But I just don't trust him to play.

So freaking confusing, and I saw someone post they thought he bounces back in 2006, I agreed w/that and drafted him in too many places...

 

[dickey moe]

Playing like a dog isn't the way to get traded. What team in their right mind will deal for him knowing that he'll quit on THEM the minute the going gets tough? And don't hold your breath waiting for him to get cut, either. Big Al is a very spiteful person. See: Porter, Jerry. He'd rather pay someone to be a malcontent than release them just to make them happy. Al has all the money in the world, and he's gonna be dead in like 30 minutes anyway, so what's the difference?

Good point. However, since Al will be "dead in 30 minutes anyway", maybe Al wants to win before that 30 minutes is up? Believe it or not, Moss still has value to a lot of teams out there, and if the Raiders can improve their team in a trade they will IMO.

Al could live to be 300, and he'd still never see this team win.

 

[jayboy444]

Playing like a dog isn't the way to get traded. What team in their right mind will deal for him knowing that he'll quit on THEM the minute the going gets tough? And don't hold your breath waiting for him to get cut, either. Big Al is a very spiteful person. See: Porter, Jerry. He'd rather pay someone to be a malcontent than release them just to make them happy. Al has all the money in the world, and he's gonna be dead in like 30 minutes anyway, so what's the difference?

who's jerry porter? is he good? couldn't the raiders use another good reciever? then why don't they play him? i don't understand.

 

[BlackHole]

I can't believe it's come to this, but I'm considering starting Desmond Clark or Ben Watson over Moss. Having Brooks back should help Moss, but playing in such a hostile environment, and I'm not sure Randy won't be dropping passes again because he's "not foccused". How many of you in shark land benched Moss a long time ago? Obviously he's making a ploy for getting cut or traded in 2007.Randy Moss has reiterated his desire to be out of Oakland in 2007.The Raiders won't require a large cap hit to cut Moss, but it would be silly if they don't explore dealing him first. Moss is now attributing his lull in production to his timing with Oakland's quarterbacks.Source: Contra Costa Times

I don't think Moss' FF production or real F production has anything to do with if he wants to be cut or not. The guy is still a captain of the team, so Art is still showing confidence in the guy (even if it like showing confidence in the skipper from Gilligans Island). Moss is still getting targets. Even when the targets are low, the targets are a pretty high percentage of the times the Raiders actually throw the damn ball without a sack.I personally think Brooks wants to show he is an NFL QB still, but this is not the week to do it. In KC, bad weather, first week back, not the usual 80% of snaps with the first team all week. I don't see his timing geting beter with a QB that has been out since week 2. I am not drinking the Brooks/Moss kool aid this week and the only thing I could see paying dividends in the Raiders O this week is Jordan. I think he is a risky play, but the best one IF, again IF, you were to play someone from the Oakland Offense this week.

 

[baronson]

Who's benching Moss, even with Brooks now starting?

everyone?

 

[BlackHole]

Who's benching Moss, even with Brooks now starting?everyone?

Yes, I am benching Moss. who wouldn't? This is not the situation/time to play him.Which means he'll get 120 yards and 2 long TD's.

 

[Horses Mouth]

starting moss over bryant. both will get a handful of touches and 50 yards. not bad for #3 WR behind CJ and Driver.

 

[JohnnyU]

I am not drinking the Brooks/Moss kool aid this week and the only thing I could see paying dividends in the Raiders O this week is Jordan. I think he is a risky play, but the best one IF, again IF, you were to play someone from the Oakland Offense this week.

I agree with you about Brooks. Having his first game back in Arrowhead isn't a recipe for success.

 

[UlyssesNorris]

Starting Bryant and Bruce over Moss, and that'll likely be the lineup for the rest of the season. I just can't see things getting better there with his attitude. Brooks' return might help, I guess, but I don't hold out a ton of hope on that front.

 

[Church of Iggy Pop]

Who's benching Moss, even with Brooks now starting?everyone?

I'm benching him this week in favor of Mark Clayton. Last week was the last straw.What a waste of a 3rd round pick.

 

[pgreenfan]

I am starting him this week over Matt Jones or Keyshawn Johnson this week.

 

[ATC1]

Gabriel over Moss for this week.

 

[pgreenfan]

I am starting him this week over Matt Jones or Keyshawn Johnson this week.

I have had Moss since his second year and I am done. If he is in Oakland next year there is no way I can protect him over Colston or Reggie Wayne.

 

[RoarinSonoran]

Playing Lee Evans over Moss in two leagues.

And how did that work out for you?

 

[gman8343]

Playing Lee Evans over Moss in two leagues.

And how did that work out for you?

Could have been worse...

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Hope he lands in Arizona.

 

[B-Scott]

I think Moss has lost a step or 2. I dont think its just about his desire like he says. He cant get open as easy as he did in the past. The guy is in his 8th year ,and not as fast as he was in 1998 ,1999 ,2000. Plus i dont think he works out hard enough in the off-season to maintain his skill level. He relied so much on natural talent.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Boy he should be embarrassed, it'll be interesting to see what the market is for him after this season.

 

[RoarinSonoran]

Hope he lands in Arizona.

I hope you mean that in the "hope he lands in Arizona as a guest of a federal penitentiary"-kind of way, otherwise :finger:. The Cardinals are enough of a media circus around here without adding a major clown on top of things. Besides, with Boldin and Fitz, and reasonable #3 WRs, I don't know if there would be enough room for the cry baby.