Can McKenzie make us a team like the 49ers?

[the_firm_09]

You were unquestionably the most pessimistic poster during that two year 'golden era' we're apparently never going to see again.

You consistently harped on the 'stupidity' of the team, the 'stupidity' of the coaches and the 'stupidity' of Al.

Now, suddenly, only the 2012 Raiders are stupid, and the teams that came before them were some sort of juggernaut machine that consistently won...?

You're joking, right?

I mean, if you really want me to, I'll go find some of your posting 'gems' in the game threads of the 2010 and 2011 seasons. You can compare your complaints in those years against your complaints from this season - perhaps that will remind you of how 'competitive' the Raiders were, IN YOUR OPINION, over the previous two seasons.

Reggie McKenzie is the closest thing the Raiders have had to sensible leadership since Gruden fled in 2001. Now's not the time to look back at the disastrous recent past wistfully.


First of all, I'm not giving up on this team playing better football in 2012; secondly, there won't be a need for excuses in 2013 because the team will be competitive.

Screw this "eyes closed" nonsense - Reggie was handed a mediocre roster that was vastly over the cap, no draft picks and he made the only logical decision - gut the roster, take the cap hits and start cleaning up the ledger sheet.

What the hell did you want him to do?

I wouldn`t call it pessimistic, this is the reality in which we survive. The team was more competitive at 8 - 8, this wasn`t because they were brilliant. They were miles away from smartness and 11 - 5.

His suggestion of a deep hole gives the illusion consecutive 4 - 12 runs, that wasn`t the case was it? The 2012 team is far worse in every phase. The last 2 seasons we were bracing for the collapse and 1/2 the time it arrived as expected.

Suddenly the 2012 Oakland Raiders are not smart you suggest in my eyes? This team was doomed from go, the last 3 weeks are the most points ever surrendered by a Raider defense, the 3rd or 4th most in the history of time in the NFL. There`s nothing to be proud of this effort, multiple times you`ve suggested that an improvement is upon in 2012, its going the other direction rapidly.

You also suggest RM as a solid leader, why because he was a good scout for the Packers? Rod Woodson was a great football player, he didn`t do so well with the uniform off. If you want to praise a GM with no track record prematurely then have at it, I believe Oakland will be heading in the wrong direction ( sorry ).

I wanted him to hand us some experience, coaches the seasoned players don`t have to baby sit would have been a better start.

[NavajoRaiderfan]

**** that! Let's be like the Raiders.

Niners?

[CaliDevil71]

the fans know more than Reggie. at least some truly believe that in their heart. would have love to seen what they could have done with 20 million over the cap.

That is what I am saying!!!

[corralski]

I wouldn`t call it pessimistic, this is the reality in which we survive. The team was more competitive at 8 - 8, this wasn`t because they were brilliant. They were miles away from smartness and 11 - 5.

His suggestion of a deep hole gives the illusion consecutive 4 - 12 runs, that wasn`t the case was it? The 2012 team is far worse in every phase. The last 2 seasons we were bracing for the collapse and 1/2 the time it arrived as expected.

Suddenly the 2012 Oakland Raiders are not smart you suggest in my eyes? This team was doomed from go, the last 3 weeks are the most points ever surrendered by a Raider defense, the 3rd or 4th most in the history of time in the NFL. There`s nothing to be proud of this effort, multiple times you`ve suggested that an improvement is upon in 2012, its going the other direction rapidly.

You also suggest RM as a solid leader, why because he was a good scout for the Packers? Rod Woodson was a great football player, he didn`t do so well with the uniform off. If you want to praise a GM with no track record prematurely then have at it, I believe Oakland will be heading in the wrong direction ( sorry ).

I wanted him to hand us some experience, coaches the seasoned players don`t have to baby sit would have been a better start.

I don't think that anyone here is prematurely calling McKenzie and Co. a rousing success. What we have here for the first time in forty years is a proper and logical delegation of authority. You speak of reality and one of the realities is that it would have been financially and logistically impossible for the goals we all seek to have been accomplished in one season.

As to the intelligence of the team, I think that in certain instances you could make a case for this and this also merits my next question. Who do you think, given the exact same scenario could have done better for the Raiders? It is reality that you could insert any name here and have the same result as the GM never takes snap one. I believe that under the circumstances that McKenzie has done all that is possible at this juncture to mold us per his plan. What is that plan you ask? Well, since we don't get asked to attend meetings I would speculate that phase one was to start purging contracts that had no value to the Raiders and plug those holes with short term replacements that wouldn't have any long term impact to the cap. I would say that this is about two thirds done.

Phase two is to accumulate draft choices as we know that our problems cannot be addressed through free agency alone. How this gets handled we have yet to see. We will also have a better evaluation at how McKenzie's eye for talent is after this off season.

As for bringing in vets, there are two questions. One is who are those special guys that would lend their talent and expertise and not counter what you are trying to build, and two, how would you pay them without starting up the over the cap carousel again?

The last thing, and this burns me a little, is just because McKenzie's resume' is a little thin at the position he currently holds doesn't mean that the man is unqualified. Guys need to think just a little on this, McKenzie comes from a franchise that is achieving some pretty impressive long term competitiveness. He also worked under the watchful eye of someone that most in the Raider nation know and respect.

Back to the OP, the Niners didn't transform over night and they started with a few key pieces of a stout D in place. They also had a somewhat normal front office in place. We started with less, much less, so to expect results on a similar time would just be insane.

McKenzie hasn't melted down or thrown anyone under the bus, he has stood at the mike and offered no excuses. Some might say that in the case of the D that he has lost the team to which I would answer that the D has responded pretty much the same as it has for the last three years as not enough change over of players has occurred yet. Unless you are just bat **** crazy, you can't hang that on McKenzie.

I suspect that the only point we probably still strongly disagree on would be a time line for completion and only allowing some more time for this to develop will show that.

Or we can be one and done and continue with the same ol' same ol'....

[Maxfly]

I wouldn`t call it pessimistic, this is the reality in which we survive. The team was more competitive at 8 - 8, this wasn`t because they were brilliant. They were miles away from smartness and 11 - 5.

His suggestion of a deep hole gives the illusion consecutive 4 - 12 runs, that wasn`t the case was it? The 2012 team is far worse in every phase. The last 2 seasons we were bracing for the collapse and 1/2 the time it arrived as expected.

Suddenly the 2012 Oakland Raiders are not smart you suggest in my eyes? This team was doomed from go, the last 3 weeks are the most points ever surrendered by a Raider defense, the 3rd or 4th most in the history of time in the NFL. There`s nothing to be proud of this effort, multiple times you`ve suggested that an improvement is upon in 2012, its going the other direction rapidly.

You also suggest RM as a solid leader, why because he was a good scout for the Packers? Rod Woodson was a great football player, he didn`t do so well with the uniform off. If you want to praise a GM with no track record prematurely then have at it, I believe Oakland will be heading in the wrong direction ( sorry ).

I wanted him to hand us some experience, coaches the seasoned players don`t have to baby sit would have been a better start.

An QB with good decision making skills means squat if he's not protected. I don't think anyone has suggested McKennzie is a solid leader ,his skills as you said was in scouting which is something Davis lost touch with yeeeears ago but he also has the knowledge and skills to get us out of this cap mess. Why people put so much emphasis on "experienced" coaches is beyond me,if they're soo experienced why are they out on the market? I don't know too many players that actually babysit the coaches but whatever.

[Raiders1951]

We have to be patient. If we make the playoffs next year it will be a miracle - still a lot of overpaid players on the roster.

And the changes so far have been huge, we had 13 players on the roster that cant even find a spot with another team:

From Steve Corkran, Contra Costa Times:
– Twenty seven players that were on the Raiders roster for the final regular-season game last season no longer are on the 53-man roster.
Wide receiver Jacoby Ford still is with the Raiders, though he is on season-ending injured reserve and doesn’t count on the 53-man roster.
Thirteen of those 27 players no longer are in the NFL. Thirteen are playing for other teams.

[corralski]

We have to be patient. If we make the playoffs next year it will be a miracle - still a lot of overpaid players on the roster.

And the changes so far have been huge, we had 13 players on the roster that cant even find a spot with another team:

From Steve Corkran, Contra Costa Times:
– Twenty seven players that were on the Raiders roster for the final regular-season game last season no longer are on the 53-man roster.
Wide receiver Jacoby Ford still is with the Raiders, though he is on season-ending injured reserve and doesn’t count on the 53-man roster.
Thirteen of those 27 players no longer are in the NFL. Thirteen are playing for other teams.

The list of former Raiders no longer in the game should just about double after the next off season. This is a HUGE statement as to just how bad this team still is.

I'm not even thinking about the playoffs. I'm more interested in seeing that the people we do acquire are a good fit for the schemes and can be coached up. We may only be athird of the way to this goal by my estimate.

I'm confident that we have adequate leadership in place, those looking for known talent on staff will continue to be disappointed. The clock should start running on the staff after this next offseason, we should be just a couple of pieces short barring injury.

This is no time to flinch, this is no time to second guess. We finally have the foundation on staff to build the team that we all believe the Raiders should be. I've been watching an embarrassing franchise for eight years, I can certainly give them a couple more for the right reasons.....

[GREATNESS ONE]

Lol @ this thread

[corralski]

^why?

[dbacknick]

The 49'ers haven't won anything in a while...so why be like them?
The defense needs to be fixed first...the secondary is the first place that I would start, then the line.
Many are saying to be patient. I've been patient for 10 years. It would be nice to at least make the playoffs for starters.

[corralski]

The 49'ers haven't won anything in a while...so why be like them?
The defense needs to be fixed first...the secondary is the first place that I would start, then the line.
Many are saying to be patient. I've been patient for 10 years. It would be nice to at least make the playoffs for starters.

Not be the Niners per say, just the systematic way they have gone about the rebuilding process.

If the process is too long, try the lions or the browns. Been way longer than ten years for them....

[dbacknick]

Not be the Niners per say, just the systematic way they have gone about the rebuilding process.

If the process is too long, try the lions or the browns. Been way longer than ten years for them....

I find no satisfaction in others' failure....I've been a Raider fan my whole life, and I don't plan on changing. Frankly, I don't care about any other team.
I'm sure a lot of other fans are getting great satisfaction with the Raider's demise. I think 10 years is long enough for this franchise.

[Maxfly]

I find no satisfaction in others' failure....I've been a Raider fan my whole life, and I don't plan on changing. Frankly, I don't care about any other team.
I'm sure a lot of other fans are getting great satisfaction with the Raider's demise. I think 10 years is long enough for this franchise.

I've been a Raider fan my whole life as well but have appreciated those teams that have been able to get out of the hole and become successful while this organization chose to do things so bassackwards it made us the laughingstock of the league. The 9ers like other successful organizations have built a team that will be successful for years as the development of Keapernick is proof and both defensive and offensive lines are solid,that's drafting,signing,developing and coaching ALL working through execution and consistancy...........that's what this organization desperatly needs.

[Shred003]

I find no satisfaction in others' failure....I've been a Raider fan my whole life, and I don't plan on changing. Frankly, I don't care about any other team.
I'm sure a lot of other fans are getting great satisfaction with the Raider's demise. I think 10 years is long enough for this franchise.

The thing is, I don't think the Raiders were going to get any better then 8-8 under Al Davis' guidance.

The long version?

2010? The Raiders were 6-0 in the AFC West, but they also had a few attrocious losses. They were blown out against Tennessee, San Francisco (worst 8 point loss in the history of the NFL) Pittsburgh and Miami. The only 'playoff' team they beat outside of the AFC West was Seattle, a team that went 7-9 in the regular season.

2011? The Raiders went 3-3 against the AFC West, and won 4 games against non-playoff teams -- New York, Cleveland, Minnesota and Chicago. The only playoff team the Raiders beat, aside from Denver, was Houston... and we all know that game was a bit of an outlier.

Recall the losses of the '11 Raiders - blown out against New England, blown out against K.C. at home -- admittedly difficult circumstances, thanks to Kyle F*ing Boller -- second half collapse against the fightin' Tebows, blown out against Miami, Green Bay and then, worst of all, blown out against San Diego, to end the season, with a playoff birth on the line.

Let's now consider the 2012 team. Oakland has lost seven games, but of those - Denver, Atlanta, Tampa, Baltimore and New Orleans are all in the mix for a playoff run and playing very good football right now. Not surprisingly, the Raiders have lost to all of those teams. In fact, the Raiders BEAT Pittsburgh, though they've had the odd 'upset' here and there since '02.

Yes, that includes blow-out losses to Miami, Denver, Baltimore and New Orleans... but there were games when Oakland was blown out last year!

To everyone who thinks that Oakland has taken some massive step back from the 'glory days' after two 8-8 years... I'm left wondering if the past two years were less high-quality Raider teams and more low-quality opponents.

Those 8-8 records were mostly due to good schedules - the Raiders have been losing games in a similar fashion for years, and this year, it just looks worse. Oakland has suffered at least 4 blow-out losses in each of the past two seasons; they were blown out in consecutive weeks against Green Bay and Miami.

The short version?

The Raiders had easy schedules in 2010 / 2011, and it's not surprising that they look 'terrible' after a stretch of playing 3 consecutive playoff caliber teams.

The '10 and '11 squads weren't as good as they seemed; the '12 squad isn't as bad as it seems.

IMO, they'll finish with 6-8 wins this year. The schedule gets easier from this point forward.

[dbacknick]

I agree with you. However, the number of wins don't mean anything to me.
If they don't make the playoffs (and they won't) then it's been a failure.
It's not the losses that bother me much, but the way that they've lost.