Bush for mcfadden

[dbacknick]

I would leave the offense skill positions alone.
We really need defense. Considering our cap situation....we might not have the money to do both. I would start with the defense first.

[RaiderNation24]

Most of what's posted in these threads seems to be suggestions as to acquisitions that would make the Raiders a better team. Then there are tons of replies that cut down any idea, trade, signing, etc. If Reggie Bush, for example, isn't a player that would help make the Raiders better offensively, then what move should this organization make in order for that to happen? Anything Raider fans can collectively agree upon? I assume all Raider fans have good intentions and want this team to succeed, but where does it all begin for the team and us as fans?

[RaiderNation24]

I would leave the offense skill positions alone.
We really need defense. Considering our cap situation....we might not have the money to do both. I would start with the defense first.

The best defense has the best offense. From a black and white perspective, use draft picks for the offense and money on the defense. There's no right or wrong answer here, though.

[DatFatCat]

STORK said it best he is unproductive Cap weight id rather spend 12 mil / 16 games for Bush than 8 million for less than 8 games for McFadden. SOMEONE will give a 3rd round for him and we can use the 2 3rds on a gaurd and a CB

[themadstork]

I don't want Reggie Bush either. I don't want to spend money on backs.

I want to be one of those teams that uses no names year in and year out, spending very little while still getting production.

And I think its with that goal in mind that we put the ZBS back into place.

-Stork

[RaiderNation24]

We`re loaded with not worth it players, this franchise has gone in a direction I`ve never imagined possible.

Reggie isn`t gonna fix this mess, he`ll be sitting up in the sky box the next 5 years as Oakland retreats 20 more years. My friends we are in big trouble, this is why Al hid Mark Davis from the world, he made a bad choice you mark my words.

The Packers were once a mediocre team, at best, from the 1970s through the 1980s. Look at their history: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/gnb/. Every team has their struggle years; it's inevitable. If you visit the website I just listed you'll notice much better overall records since McKenzie became a scout in 1994 and moved up the ranks as the Packers' director of player personnel and the team's director of football operations. Reggie made a positive impact on that organization due to his ability to spot and sign talent. During Reggie’s time in Green Bay, there were only two seasons where the Packers had more losses than wins, and two 8-8 records. If the goal for the Raiders is to have continuity, consistency, and successful seasons, then how is Reggie not the right guy for the Raiders' GM job? He’ll restore this franchise and make them a contender again. Look at the last 20 years when Reggie was with the Packers: there were only 4 head coaches as opposed to Al Davis' 10 head coaches in Oakland’s last decade.

If there is neither consistency nor continuity in the head coach position, then erratic and unsuccessful seasons will be the result due to lack of time for any coach to implement their scheme. Don't find this to be true? Look at the last 10 years for the Raiders. Al Davis wanted things done his way. Unfortunately, he thought his way was the only and best way. He held the Raiders back from achieving success ever since he traded Gruden because he wouldn’t tolerate Al’s micromanaging methods and stronghold grip. Who replaces a coach that never had anything worse than two 8-8 records along with a 10-6 and 12-4 record in the span of 4 years? Al Davis. Your argument is mere speculation with no validity. If Reggie's impact in Green Bay isn't enough proof, then you're the lone wolf in this thread. There's every reason to believe and have faith in Reggie & Co.

[JmrcusSUX]

Reggie Bush has not been consistent in his career to even take him in consideration. We need a Michael Bush type RB with a tad more speed

[RaiderNation24]

Michael Bush was more of a power runner than speed runner. Wish the Raiders had the money to keep him in Oakland. I think Reece will be alright handling the ball.

[Priest]

Bernard from Carolina might slip into the early third round.

Bernard most likely will be a 2nd rounder. Considering alot of boards have him at the top of the RB prospect list. Talented, but we need defense bad. We can find a serviceable RB later that can run in this scheme. I am not a big fan cuz some say he is 200 lbs and some say 205. We have a guy on this team who is 200 lbs and is faster(TJ).

Thinkin we need MLB, 2 corners BAAAD. Then RT, Then RB, Then DL.

Someone like Montee Ball?

[TrueFan420]

We need to build the lines o side and d. Then we can build from there.

[raiderdave]

Reggie Bush is on my fantasy team, and he has been basicly a disapointment.

[slvrandblkatack]

Keep Mcfadden and draft a young guy that can share the load and maybe eventually take over. Also add some better options in undrafted or free agents.

[JMClarkent]

I'd like to stay way from high priced offensive free agents unless they help upgrade our line. I'd love to see a new RT, C (moving Wis to G) and a guard.

[NavajoRaiderfan]

We need to concentrate on the trenches.

[Snake Plissken]

I don't want Reggie Bush either. I don't want to spend money on backs.

I want to be one of those teams that uses no names year in and year out, spending very little while still getting production.

And I think its with that goal in mind that we put the ZBS back into place.

-Stork

Great point. I used to marvel at the production Shanahan would get signing guys essentially off the street to play tailback.