Official: Oakland Raiders 2015/2016 Season Thread
04-30-2015, 08:04 PM
#46
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Official: Oakland Raiders 2014/2015 Season Thread
I wanted Williams, Cooper or White at #4. so I'm happy. he's going to take a lot of pressure off Carr and the other receivers. maybe even the running game will improve.
04-30-2015, 08:39 PM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
They need a talented receiver really bad. I was hoping for White > Cooper, but at least they got someone that can start helping right away.
05-01-2015, 05:45 PM
#49
I'm not hating that round 2 pick.
I still think Williams in the first Strong in the Second was better. But this works too.
I will say this... if strong falls to the 3rd round it might not be a terrible idea to grab him... even though they really should be picking secondary or o-line with that pick.
I still think Williams in the first Strong in the Second was better. But this works too.
I will say this... if strong falls to the 3rd round it might not be a terrible idea to grab him... even though they really should be picking secondary or o-line with that pick.
05-03-2015, 08:04 PM
#51
I am not unhappy with this draft at all. I would have gone with Williams and gone with Strong in the second but I don't think they were wrong going with a play now WR. Plus good WR's have a longer life span. IF this kid is as good as he's supposed to be we could be seeing the beginning of the next Manning/Wayne kind of deal.
05-04-2015, 01:20 PM
#53
Interesting move dropping James Jones. Only way it makes sense to me is if he requested to be dropped and they're honoring that. He's a veteran. He's consistent. My guess is he saw crabtree as a similar player to him. New number 1 in the draft. 2 guys that are reason number 3/4 receivers... he knew he'd probably be looking at a 70 target season and he doesn't want that. Probably requested to be dropped.
Jones played in all 16 games last year and had 73 catches out of 111 looks. That's 66%. Not huge yardage but that's not what they need him for.
Crabtree is who they're replacing him with... He played all 16 last year. 68 out of 108. 63%. He was suppose to have a huge year and be the focus of the offense. He's gonna have to do better than that to make dropping Jones the right move. He's got to have an 85/1000/10 season. And be a locker room leader. And not get hurt.
Jones played in all 16 games last year and had 73 catches out of 111 looks. That's 66%. Not huge yardage but that's not what they need him for.
Crabtree is who they're replacing him with... He played all 16 last year. 68 out of 108. 63%. He was suppose to have a huge year and be the focus of the offense. He's gonna have to do better than that to make dropping Jones the right move. He's got to have an 85/1000/10 season. And be a locker room leader. And not get hurt.
05-04-2015, 05:30 PM
#54
aka FlukeWRX
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Bay
Posts: 3,657
Car Info: '03 WRX WRB Sedan
If the Raiders don't take James Jones back, then thinking the Browns or the Chiefs should pick him up.
Though I could see cases for these 6 other teams as well: Ravens, Dolphins, Rams, Chargers, Panthers or Saints. Either way, I don't see him being out of work for too long (provided there isn't something wrong with him that would not allow him to pass a physical).
Though I could see cases for these 6 other teams as well: Ravens, Dolphins, Rams, Chargers, Panthers or Saints. Either way, I don't see him being out of work for too long (provided there isn't something wrong with him that would not allow him to pass a physical).
08-12-2015, 12:27 PM
#55
I Don't See Any Way The Raiders Stay In Oakland
As shi**y as the Oakland City Council is I'm glad the city isn't willing to spend tax payer's money on a new stadium. The NFL and the owners make waaaay too much money to need any handouts from the cities.
It sucks, but maybe this will push the city to focus on keeping the A's and getting them a new ball park. The coliseum was such a nice baseball venue before the Raiders moved back and fleeced the city/county with the monstrosity that is Mt. Davis.
-Brian
As shi**y as the Oakland City Council is I'm glad the city isn't willing to spend tax payer's money on a new stadium. The NFL and the owners make waaaay too much money to need any handouts from the cities.
It sucks, but maybe this will push the city to focus on keeping the A's and getting them a new ball park. The coliseum was such a nice baseball venue before the Raiders moved back and fleeced the city/county with the monstrosity that is Mt. Davis.
-Brian
08-12-2015, 09:54 PM
#56
Should just build the A's a stadium on the water and remodel the current stadium for the Raiders.
But the Raiders organization is out of it's mind if it thinks it can survive another move and sharing a stadium with a team in the same damned division. About the worst idea ever. If they move I don't know if I can be a Raiders fan anymore and I've been on since birth.
I personally think that they missed a huge opportunity to join forces and jump on the Santa Clara bandwagon. They could have very easily split that stadium.
Building a new stadium in Oakland does make a lot of sense though.
1. Building it creates jobs and you can write legal in saying a certain percentage of the companies and employees hired to build it must be local.
2. When you build it you build int close to the water and remind people that oakland is nice in some areas.
3. When you build it you build in surface level business's, apartments, etc Build an entire business district and sign extended leases.
4. New stadiums... larger stadiums... means more people want to use them. So you have special event money coming in... more jobs... etc.
5. A nice new stadium on the water in conjunction with the new niners stadium, standfords facilities, the giants ball park and the shark tank give you a platform to bid for olympics. Olympic means literally billions of dollars dumped into the area.
The Raiders belong in Oakland. Moving them back down south would be retarded. Hell, the chargers are barely surviving down there.
Let someone else move there and tank. Put the Rams back there.
But the Raiders organization is out of it's mind if it thinks it can survive another move and sharing a stadium with a team in the same damned division. About the worst idea ever. If they move I don't know if I can be a Raiders fan anymore and I've been on since birth.
I personally think that they missed a huge opportunity to join forces and jump on the Santa Clara bandwagon. They could have very easily split that stadium.
Building a new stadium in Oakland does make a lot of sense though.
1. Building it creates jobs and you can write legal in saying a certain percentage of the companies and employees hired to build it must be local.
2. When you build it you build int close to the water and remind people that oakland is nice in some areas.
3. When you build it you build in surface level business's, apartments, etc Build an entire business district and sign extended leases.
4. New stadiums... larger stadiums... means more people want to use them. So you have special event money coming in... more jobs... etc.
5. A nice new stadium on the water in conjunction with the new niners stadium, standfords facilities, the giants ball park and the shark tank give you a platform to bid for olympics. Olympic means literally billions of dollars dumped into the area.
The Raiders belong in Oakland. Moving them back down south would be retarded. Hell, the chargers are barely surviving down there.
Let someone else move there and tank. Put the Rams back there.
08-13-2015, 07:55 AM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
The way I see it:
- Raiders & Chargers share stadium in LA (either Carson or Inglewood)
- Chargers change to NFC West and Seahawks back to AFC West
- Rams relocate somewhere else
Why? Because NFL.
- Raiders & Chargers share stadium in LA (either Carson or Inglewood)
- Chargers change to NFC West and Seahawks back to AFC West
- Rams relocate somewhere else
Why? Because NFL.
08-14-2015, 09:57 AM
#58
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
I Don't See Any Way The Raiders Stay In Oakland
As shi**y as the Oakland City Council is I'm glad the city isn't willing to spend tax payer's money on a new stadium. The NFL and the owners make waaaay too much money to need any handouts from the cities.
It sucks, but maybe this will push the city to focus on keeping the A's and getting them a new ball park. The coliseum was such a nice baseball venue before the Raiders moved back and fleeced the city/county with the monstrosity that is Mt. Davis.
-Brian
As shi**y as the Oakland City Council is I'm glad the city isn't willing to spend tax payer's money on a new stadium. The NFL and the owners make waaaay too much money to need any handouts from the cities.
It sucks, but maybe this will push the city to focus on keeping the A's and getting them a new ball park. The coliseum was such a nice baseball venue before the Raiders moved back and fleeced the city/county with the monstrosity that is Mt. Davis.
-Brian
I also don't want tax payer money for rich people's stadiums. I'm okay with them moving.
08-14-2015, 10:11 AM
#59
Old School
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Union City
Posts: 14,983
Car Info: '99 RBP GM6
Should just build the A's a stadium on the water and remodel the current stadium for the Raiders.
But the Raiders organization is out of it's mind if it thinks it can survive another move and sharing a stadium with a team in the same damned division. About the worst idea ever. If they move I don't know if I can be a Raiders fan anymore and I've been on since birth.
I personally think that they missed a huge opportunity to join forces and jump on the Santa Clara bandwagon. They could have very easily split that stadium.
Building a new stadium in Oakland does make a lot of sense though.
1. Building it creates jobs and you can write legal in saying a certain percentage of the companies and employees hired to build it must be local.
2. When you build it you build int close to the water and remind people that oakland is nice in some areas.
3. When you build it you build in surface level business's, apartments, etc Build an entire business district and sign extended leases.
4. New stadiums... larger stadiums... means more people want to use them. So you have special event money coming in... more jobs... etc.
5. A nice new stadium on the water in conjunction with the new niners stadium, standfords facilities, the giants ball park and the shark tank give you a platform to bid for olympics. Olympic means literally billions of dollars dumped into the area.
The Raiders belong in Oakland. Moving them back down south would be retarded. Hell, the chargers are barely surviving down there.
Let someone else move there and tank. Put the Rams back there.
But the Raiders organization is out of it's mind if it thinks it can survive another move and sharing a stadium with a team in the same damned division. About the worst idea ever. If they move I don't know if I can be a Raiders fan anymore and I've been on since birth.
I personally think that they missed a huge opportunity to join forces and jump on the Santa Clara bandwagon. They could have very easily split that stadium.
Building a new stadium in Oakland does make a lot of sense though.
1. Building it creates jobs and you can write legal in saying a certain percentage of the companies and employees hired to build it must be local.
2. When you build it you build int close to the water and remind people that oakland is nice in some areas.
3. When you build it you build in surface level business's, apartments, etc Build an entire business district and sign extended leases.
4. New stadiums... larger stadiums... means more people want to use them. So you have special event money coming in... more jobs... etc.
5. A nice new stadium on the water in conjunction with the new niners stadium, standfords facilities, the giants ball park and the shark tank give you a platform to bid for olympics. Olympic means literally billions of dollars dumped into the area.
The Raiders belong in Oakland. Moving them back down south would be retarded. Hell, the chargers are barely surviving down there.
Let someone else move there and tank. Put the Rams back there.
I'm okay with them moving, if that ensures their financial stability. I don't get the sharing the with Chargers, but it works for other places, and makes tons of financial sense.
I'd prefer they to stay, but, owners are going to go were people are willing to give free money away. Just how this works I guess.
08-14-2015, 07:13 PM
#60
It doesn't make any sense for them to move to LA.
The Rams failed there. The Raiders failed there. The Chargers aren't much good and their crowds sucks. People keep saying that they should have a football team because they're so large... etc.
Bottom line... you go to SoCal to die.
I'm from there. I'm a Raiders/USC fan. I grew up. The first move didn't effect me and the second move made me happy because they were back up here. Moving back down makes no sense to me.
It'll be bad for the fan base. Bad for the NFL. Bad for Oakland.
Oakland is on the upswing right now and have the potential to be pretty darn good over the next 5-8 years. They shouldn't have any trouble getting $200 plus million out of a sponsor. They should be able to get land and a good contract from Oakland for building a business center. They can probably find a big company willing to drop a lot more than $200m if they include a business center as part of the stadium grounds and the company gets to use them .
Tax money honestly isn't going to get them where they need to be anyways.
It's got to come from the organization, sponsors, season ticket sales, etc.
I honestly don't see it happening.
Most likely it'll end up them sharing with San Diego just because it's going to be the easiest to pull off financially. But I hate the idea.
The Rams failed there. The Raiders failed there. The Chargers aren't much good and their crowds sucks. People keep saying that they should have a football team because they're so large... etc.
Bottom line... you go to SoCal to die.
I'm from there. I'm a Raiders/USC fan. I grew up. The first move didn't effect me and the second move made me happy because they were back up here. Moving back down makes no sense to me.
It'll be bad for the fan base. Bad for the NFL. Bad for Oakland.
Oakland is on the upswing right now and have the potential to be pretty darn good over the next 5-8 years. They shouldn't have any trouble getting $200 plus million out of a sponsor. They should be able to get land and a good contract from Oakland for building a business center. They can probably find a big company willing to drop a lot more than $200m if they include a business center as part of the stadium grounds and the company gets to use them .
Tax money honestly isn't going to get them where they need to be anyways.
It's got to come from the organization, sponsors, season ticket sales, etc.
I honestly don't see it happening.
Most likely it'll end up them sharing with San Diego just because it's going to be the easiest to pull off financially. But I hate the idea.