Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
Sometimes I am baffled by the sheer stupidity of
some front office "gurus", who shouldn't even be in the business.
some front office "gurus", who shouldn't even be in the business.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Why wouldn't OAK part with a 6th round pick ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ron_Mexico
- Start date
Shake and Bake
Footballguy
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
Because Billy Volek sucks.
Even if you think he doesn't suck, I don't think you could say that he's good enough to make Oakland an immediate contender. And if they're not going to contend, they might as well see what they have in Andrew Walter, a guy that they're very high on in the organization.
Basically, the question is - why WOULD they trade for Volek? Do you think Volek coming in and maybe leading the team to 4 wins will make Oakland less likely to take Brady Quinn next season?
Even if you think he doesn't suck, I don't think you could say that he's good enough to make Oakland an immediate contender. And if they're not going to contend, they might as well see what they have in Andrew Walter, a guy that they're very high on in the organization.
Basically, the question is - why WOULD they trade for Volek? Do you think Volek coming in and maybe leading the team to 4 wins will make Oakland less likely to take Brady Quinn next season?
i agree with Jets. Why give up a draft pick when your team is going NOWHERE and he's not going to be in your future plans unless it's as a backup QB. You need someone back there who is mobile right now, that offensive line cant protect anyone. They are gonna have a long year in Oakland, but to think that trading for Billy Volek would have been the answer to winning some games is just silly.
Weapon of Mass Instruction
Watch my feet!
If I am Billy Volek and had a no trade clause and SD and OAK have offers on the table --> don't I agree to waive it for SD but refuse to go to OAK?
fatboyj711
Footballguy
it's obvious that volek is not QB1 material, and maybe they don't want to give up a 6th rounder for a player who will be the primary backup for 2 games then the qb3 the rest of the season... why give up a draft pick for a lost cause when you can continue rebuilding your team through the draft... makes perfect sense to me
Weapon of Mass Instruction
Watch my feet!
What, exactly, is so obvious?
offdee
Footballguy
Exactly. Anybody who has watched the past two Raiders games can easily see that the poor QB performance has everything to do with the atrocious offensive line protection. The QB's don't even get a chance to finish their 3/5/7 step drops and a Defensive player is on his back. Peyton Manning, let alone Billy Volek, couldn't perform under those conditions.The Raiders O-line is a joke really, I can honestly say I've never seen anything like it before.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
I agree that their offensive line needs help,
but when you can upgrade your QB position for a 6th round pick,
you do it, and you do it quickly.
but when you can upgrade your QB position for a 6th round pick,
you do it, and you do it quickly.
diesel7982
Footballguy
Am I the only one that realizes how bad Volek is?
fatboyj711
Footballguy
volek not being QB1 material is not obvious... or is kerry collins just THAT good???
PatsWillWin
Footballguy
Nope.
Sinrman
Footballguy
Though mostly untested, it baffles me that KC nor Oakland went after Volek. They inquired about him, so they must have had a mild interest at least. A 6th/possible 5th was too much?! That's nothing for someone who could fit in quickly as your starter (at least for this season).
Only explanation I can think of for Oakland, at least, is that they are not seriously interested in winning games this year. They see how horrible this team is already, and are interested in the 1st pick overall in next year's draft (likely Quinn).
Only explanation I can think of for Oakland, at least, is that they are not seriously interested in winning games this year. They see how horrible this team is already, and are interested in the 1st pick overall in next year's draft (likely Quinn).
Riffraff
Footballguy
This is the correct answer.They don't need a QB, they need OL help.
Every time I read something about the Raiders ending up with Brady Quinn, it makes me :X - and I'm a Raiders fan.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
The Raiders, and most likely the Chiefs, are not contenders this year. Why on earth would they want to give up draft picks at this juncture for a scrub QB who isn't in their long term plans and get stuck with Volek's salary in the process?
The confusion over this evident on this board is another great example of the divide between fantasy football and real football.
The confusion over this evident on this board is another great example of the divide between fantasy football and real football.
The Raiders have the same group of O-linemen they did last year and they were not nearly this bad. The problem is the coaching. What I am witnessing right now is the worst coaching job on the NFL level I've seen in the 27 years I've been watching the NFL.
Art Shell was right when he defended his benching of Porter by saying WR's are not the problem. He is.
Art Shell was right when he defended his benching of Porter by saying WR's are not the problem. He is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
It's painfully obvious that they need both.Aaron Brooks is a complete farce.
Traders2001
Footballguy
Ok so there is two of you.Why , what make you say he is bad . Two years ago when he replaced Mcnair did nt he threw like 16 TDs in the last 7 games he started . Ok last year he was nt that good but he only played in two games i think.So why all this hate for the guy The Bills , Browns , Texans ,Redskins ,Lions , Titans ( where he comes from ),Raiders , Buccaneers are all teams with QB`s that are not even close to be as good as Volek.
BigRed
Footballguy
Moot point since there's no way they take Quinn anyway. Davis never takes QBs high - the one time he tried (Marinovich) it stung him big-time and he'll never forget it. He's a trade-for-the-vet kinda guy and that will be the M.O. in OAK until he dies. So forget OAK taking Quinn or whoever the stud QB draftee is considered to be by April. PS sure he isn't the answer, but well worth a 6th rounder - however the salary thing probably makes it not worth it. Hey there's always Jeff George.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
concur.... a voice of reason
Bertha
dickey moe alias
He may suck, but he's a hell of a lot better than what they have now. If you're the Raiders, you should have given up a 6th round pick or better for him.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
Brooks better than Volek ?This guy cannot run an offense, period.He is freaking lost out there.Albeit he has little support,but he also has zero talent.ZERO.News flash:Brooks > VolekAnd I'll be the first to admit Brooks isn't a good real life NFL QB.Did everyone here with the Volekhave him at the end of 2004? That's the only possible explanation for the near hysterical overrating of this guy I'm seeing in this thread.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
Code:
1999 Green Bay Packers 0 0 0 0 --- 0 --- 0 0 0 0/0 0 0 ---2000 New Orleans Saints 8 5 194 113 58.2 1514 7.80 53 9 6 15/94 20 4 85.72001 New Orleans Saints 16 16 558 312 55.9 3832 6.87 63 26 22 50/330 55 13 76.42002 New Orleans Saints 16 16 528 283 53.6 3572 6.77 64 27 15 36/236 47 12 80.12003 New Orleans Saints 16 16 518 306 59.1 3546 6.85 76 24 8 34/195 36 7 88.82004 New Orleans Saints 16 16 542 309 57.0 3810 7.03 57 21 16 41/223 57 5 79.52005 New Orleans Saints 13 13 431 240 55.7 2882 6.69 66 13 17 33/202 38 4 70.02006 Oakland Raiders 2 2 14 6 42.9 68 4.86 20 0 0 7/43 1 0 58.0TOTAL 87 84 2785 1569 56.3 19224 6.90 76 120 84 216/1323 254 45 79.6
I think it's far from certain that Volek will beat out Whitehurst for the number two job.Did everyone here with the Volek
Dexter Manley
Footballguy
A better question is why would any team want Volek as anything but a backup? Fisher and Chow are really good coaches. Does it not raise a red flag the size of the state of Texas, when after giving Volek the starting job and preparing him all offseason and preseason, that the Titans grab Kerry Collins off the street less than 2 weeks before the opener and make him the starter over Billy V.?
Volek doesn't have the work ethic to be a regular starting nfl qb -- think Billy Joe Gunrack. The only logical reason the Raiders would have for trading for Volek would be if Brooks was out longer than 2 - 4 weeks, because their qb's are getting murdered behind that sieve of a line.
And this is coming from a guy who had Volek and Bennett 2 years ago when they destroyed entire teams by themselves.
Volek doesn't have the work ethic to be a regular starting nfl qb -- think Billy Joe Gunrack. The only logical reason the Raiders would have for trading for Volek would be if Brooks was out longer than 2 - 4 weeks, because their qb's are getting murdered behind that sieve of a line.
And this is coming from a guy who had Volek and Bennett 2 years ago when they destroyed entire teams by themselves.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
I think it would probaby work out that if Rivers went down in game, Volek would come in first. But if Rivers was out with a week of preparation available, Whitehurst would have the edge in getting the start that week.I'm totally talking out my @55 here, but that's my take on it.I think it's far from certain that Volek will beat out Whitehurst for the number two job.Did everyone here with the Volek
Fisher and Chow have really big EGOS, as does the GM in Tinnissee -- they haven't proven much as coaches (well, at least in the NFL), other than Fisher putting together a ho-hum team behind league MVP-talent McNair and Hall of Famer Eddie George. Those egos have doomed that team to 2-3 MORE years of 2-5 win seasons, at which point ALL will be long gone before that team is ever again vying for even a .500 record. Billy Volek and/or his agent pissed SOMEBODY off to such a degree that he was traded for a bag of used jock straps. Vince Young looks like Brad Smith's bloated idiot (viva la Wonderlic!) brother so far. Kerry Collins is a JOKE. EVERYTHING about this situation is monumentally ridiculous. Volek would have delivered that team a respectable 6-8 win season. Cutler/Leinart would have delivered a .500 season within 3-years, and a potential consistent playoff team after that. Right NOW? This team is officially DOGCRAFPOLA for the rest of the DECADE. GOOD JOB, TITANS!
I totally disagree with this statement.
Perhaps posters could explain how Brooks had the success he did in NO for as many years, given he had "zero" talent.
My two cents:
(a) Brooks is a worse than average NFL starting QB
(b) Almost everything else in OAK is a bigger problem than he is.
© Volek probably is not good enough to be the worst starting QB. But maybe he is in the bottom quartile.
In the right situation, Brooks would be fine. Look what Parcells did with Bledsoe given that QBs stats in BUF. With a good rushing game and a good defense, Brooks would be okay because Shell could avoid putting him in bad situations.
My two cents:
(a) Brooks is a worse than average NFL starting QB
(b) Almost everything else in OAK is a bigger problem than he is.
© Volek probably is not good enough to be the worst starting QB. But maybe he is in the bottom quartile.
In the right situation, Brooks would be fine. Look what Parcells did with Bledsoe given that QBs stats in BUF. With a good rushing game and a good defense, Brooks would be okay because Shell could avoid putting him in bad situations.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
When I say ZERO talent,
I am referring to the present day.
Here is a year by year list of Aaron Brooks QB ratings,
he has been going down hill for the past 4 years......
2000 - 85.7
2001 - 76.4
2002 - 80.1
2003 - 88.8
2004 - 79.5
2005 - 70.0
2006 - 58.0
these are not stellar numbers by any stretch.
I am referring to the present day.
Here is a year by year list of Aaron Brooks QB ratings,
he has been going down hill for the past 4 years......
2000 - 85.7
2001 - 76.4
2002 - 80.1
2003 - 88.8
2004 - 79.5
2005 - 70.0
2006 - 58.0
these are not stellar numbers by any stretch.
