The oakland raiders suck!

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

Big deal! Raiders are going to kick their way to wins. Expect their offense to score 21 points a game....7 field goals and not INTs (not returned for touchdowns).

You may be joking but that might not be far from the truth. The only things in preseason that give you an inkling about how a team will perform in regular season are overall patterns from the 1st teamers. Our starters have been able to move the ball up and down the field but suck inside the 20. I predict our offense to put up point totals like 19 and 26.

Amazing a teams loses their good pieces in the offseason and thier fans still think they just got better.

See, that's just people not really understanding the Raider defense and the players within it. You're talking about the worst Raider defense in team history (2011). Stanford Routt sucked. The dude gave up the most TD passes in the league last season and was called for the most PI's. In any system and on any team, those numbers suck balls. We're better off without him.

As for Kamerion Wimbley, he sucked too. In one game against San Diego he recorded 4 sacks against a 3rd string tackle that had about two days of practice going into the game. In the other 15 games he played in he got a total of 3 sacks. While sacks don't tell the whole story it's notable that he wasn't good at plain pressuring the quarterback. Also, he (along with the rest of team) sucked in the run game and he couldn't cover a leftover ham with tinfoil.

It can be said that we could have lost the entire starting defensive unit from last season and been better off for it this year. This years Raider defense is certainly better than any D we'll have had in the last ten years. It won't be great but it'll be adequate enough so that if the offense scores an average amount of points, we'll win more games than we'll lose.

If I'm wrong and the defense isn't competent, then we're completely f'd.

Expect stands for home
games full of fans dressed as Bane.
The Oakland Raiders.

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/sto...ku-nfl-preview

[Bronco Rob]

Originally Posted by dictionary

Expect stands for home
games full of fans dressed as Bane.
The Oakland Raiders.

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/sto...ku-nfl-preview

Originally Posted by broncocalijohn

Big deal! Raiders are going to kick their way to wins. Expect their offense to score 21 points a game....7 field goals and not INTs (not returned for touchdowns).

Amazing a teams loses their good pieces in the offseason and thier fans still think they just got better. They are the Cubs of the NFL except many don't bother to go to the games when they suck. Safety then becomes a reality when going to Oakland.

You are so wrong it's laughable....SMH....

[Raider Bill]

The irony here is Ron Bartell was cut because he had a neck injury

[Raider Bill]

We dont need the second coming of Lester Hayes out there any more.

I mean who hell are Ladarius Webb and Cary Williams?

If you are doing the right things up front, you dont need all world cornerbacks, you just need guys who are competent.

We upgraded our DL depth with Dave Tollefson and Desmond Bryant.

We upgraded our SSLB with Wheeler, a true linebacker and not a 3-4 edge rusher masquerading as a 4-3 OLB.

Bush hurts, but Goodson and Taiwan Jones provide RB depth, and with the cutback and vaseline scheme it really doesnt matter, you can plug anyone in back there, remember?

Losing Wimbley hurts the pass rush margainally, but by all accounts Seymour and Kelly are playing with a renewed enthusiasm, and the push they provide right up the middle shortens the edge for the DE's and blitzers. And we were missing Shaughnessy for 15 games who was a young improving pass rusher.

[Raider Bill]

From the looks of this game, I am not worried one little bit about our corners.. these replacement officials aren't calling a dammned thing.

Originally Posted by Raider Bill

From the looks of this game, I am not worried one little bit about our corners.. these replacement officials aren't calling a dammned thing.

That's good and bad bro...

Originally Posted by Raider Bill

From the looks of this game, I am not worried one little bit about our corners.. these replacement officials aren't calling a dammned thing.

Not like they will be around much more.

[Bronco Rob]

Originally Posted by Fight_On!

You are so wrong it's laughable....SMH....

You lost you leading rusher, starting tight end, starting center, best pass rusher, and best corner.

Did I miss anything?

[Bronco Rob]

[Anikai]

I programmed my DVR to record "the Biggest Loser"...Now I have every Raider game on my DVR.

Originally Posted by Bronco Rob

You lost you leading rusher, starting tight end, starting center, best pass rusher, and best corner.

Did I miss anything?

Maybe. Besides being wrong about 1, 3, 4, and 5, you were right on.

Seriously man, do you make an effort to know jack**** or does it just come naturally?

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by Bacillus Anthracis

Maybe. Besides being wrong about 1, 3, 4, and 5, you were right on.

Seriously man, do you make an effort to know jack**** or does it just come naturally?

Like how you were wrong about us game-planning?

Originally Posted by Bronco Rob

Ahem......uh......what exactly have the Donkeys done since 2002 ? Hmmmmm, I am waiting......uh.....waiting.....because in 2002 the Raiders won the AFC championship...so what have the Donkeys done......nothing of any great significance.

Originally Posted by Bacillus Anthracis

Maybe. Besides being wrong about 1, 3, 4, and 5, you were right on.

Seriously man, do you make an effort to know jack**** or does it just come naturally?

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Like how you were wrong about us game-planning?

So if I was wrong (and I don't know that I was), it somehow makes you right about things you're wrong about? My one mistake makes your willful ignorance correct? Or is it possible that two people can be wrong about something? Or is there some sort of invisible balancing force in the universe that distributes right and wrong opinions equally in order to keep it all from collapsing in on itself?

One more thing. All teams in the NFL gameplan for one game in the preseason every year, but Denver didn't do that this preseason?

So either A) The Peyton Mannings never gameplanned, unlike every other team in the league does every single year, or B) They gameplanned a different game and looked like complete crap doing so.

If A is the case, then it's highly exceptional.

If B is the case and they gameplanned for a game that was not the San Francisco game, then you guys are in deep trouble because outside of that, Manning's looked horrible.

Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation for a given thing is probably the best explanation. Therefore, according to that, Denver looked good against SF because they put together a plan before the game.

[Irish Stout]

Originally Posted by Fight_On!

Ahem......uh......what exactly have the Donkeys done since 2002 ? Hmmmmm, I am waiting......uh.....waiting.....because in 2002 the Raiders won the AFC championship...so what have the Donkeys done......nothing of any great significance.

We've been to the playoffs since 2002. At least 4 times since 2002.

[Irish Stout]

Originally Posted by Bacillus Anthracis

So if I was wrong (and I don't know that I was), it somehow makes you right about things you're wrong about? My one mistake makes your willful ignorance correct? Or is it possible that two people can be wrong about something? Or is there some sort of invisible balancing force in the universe that distributes right and wrong opinions equally in order to keep it all from collapsing in on itself?

One more thing. All teams in the NFL gameplan for one game in the preseason every year, but Denver didn't do that this preseason?

So either A) The Peyton Mannings never gameplanned, unlike every other team in the league does every single year, or B) They gameplanned a different game and looked like complete crap doing so.

If A is the case, then it's highly exceptional.

If B is the case and they gameplanned for a game that was not the San Francisco game, then you guys are in deep trouble because outside of that, Manning's looked horrible.

Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation for a given thing is probably the best explanation. Therefore, according to that, Denver looked good against SF because they put together a plan before the game.

Except they didn't. The extent of their game planning for SF was to try the no huddle a bit more. Again the announcers said it, Fox said it before the game and after, Manning said it, Decker said it... someone else probably said it too. They just went in and worked on their playbook like they would in practice.

Originally Posted by Irish Stout

We've been to the playoffs since 2002. At least 4 times since 2002.

Uh....no. Reaching the playoffs 4 times is not an accomplishment of any great significance.

[Br0nc0Buster]

Originally Posted by Bacillus Anthracis

Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation for a given thing is probably the best explanation. Therefore, according to that, Denver looked good against SF because they put together a plan before the game.

How is an explanation which includes the players and coaching staff lying to everyone about game planning a preseason game the "simplest"?

The simplest explanation would be that you do not understand how preseason football works

Unless you can actually back up the claim that "everyone that has ever coached in the NFL has gameplanned a preseason game each year", I will just assume you are still talking out of your ass

[Br0nc0Buster]

I did not understand how a conversation about gameplanning a preseason game even started, I mean I cannot think of a more meaningless discussion

Then I remember the Raiders have not been to the playoffs in like 10 years.
It makes sense why fans of a team that has been dog**** in the regular season for a decade would place so much emphasis on preseason

Originally Posted by Br0nc0Buster

I did not understand how a conversation about gameplanning a preseason game even started, I mean I cannot think of a more meaningless discussion

It can't be helped that you didn't follow the conversation

Then I remember the Raiders have not been to the playoffs in like 10 years.
It makes sense why fans of a team that has been dog**** in the regular season for a decade would place so much emphasis on preseason

We may not have been to the playoffs but we've kicked your ass four out of the last 5 games. So if we suck that badly then you guys suck even worse.

[bowtown]

Originally Posted by Fight_On!

Uh....no. Reaching the playoffs 4 times is not an accomplishment of any great significance.

[Br0nc0Buster]

Originally Posted by Bacillus Anthracis

It can't be helped that you didn't follow the conversation




We may not have been to the playoffs but we've kicked your ass four out of the last 5 games. So if we suck that badly then you guys suck even worse.

Our division tiles say otherwise