Thread: The Oakland Raiders Are the Team to Beat in 2016

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

This is my opinion in a nutshell

SHOULD finish above .500, but not guaranteed.

To be honest, the only one I thing can cause us to break this futility record is Derek Carr. If he isn't better than last year, we're 8-8.

That's how I see it. I was disappointed with the way he started last year. It was the embodiment of a brain fart.

The West is going to be tough if all of the teams stay healthy.

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

I hear this a lot, mostly from Broncos fans. What is it about him? It can't be a Wade Phillips comparison because Wade is on another level as a DC.

I personally am not wowed or dismayed yet. But on the flip side, he took over for a LOT of shitty coaches.

The fanbase as a whole felt as though he was too conservative and often times called games so as not to lose, as if he was afraid to take risks. Even one or two former players called him out on social media during the playoff loss to the Colts for the lack of blitzes. I think he only brought more than 4 rushers 5 times the entire game, or something to that effect.

Truth: All the teams in the AFC West have a reasonable shot. Including San Diego. People constantly rip Phyllis, and I'd be happy to as well. He's not at all my favorite person. But, he was 2nd in the NFL in passing yards last season (4,792 yards) behind only Drew Brees, had 29 TDs and only 13 picks and a passer rating of 93. That's not a bad season. He's still a lot better QB than Alex Smith.

Denver has the worst QB situation, but the best defense. SD is probably the worst roster, but they still have a decent QB in Phyllis. KC has Alex Smith and not a ton of play-makers on offense, but a pretty good defense. Oakland has Derek Carr, and an improving defense, but also Jack Del Rio who has never ever been a great head coach. Not anywhere. And this ain't his first go-round.

None of these teams are guaranteed success stories. It would not be a shock if ANY one of them finished at 8-8 or worse.

With Denver, they've lost Peyton Manning and a couple of starters on defense. Losing Manning's leadership will be a big blow, don't kid yourself otherwise.

With the other teams they have all underachieved these last 3 years, and there's no reason to think they can't or won't again. Denver is still the way to bet.

Sure, the Raiders have lots of "smart money" people rooting for them. But, that was true last season, as I quoted Ben Maller and other idiots claiming at the beginning of the 2015 season. It didn't happen then and there's no better reason to think it will happen this year.

The popular notion that Derek Carr is the best QB in the AFCW is utter bullshit.

The Raider's defense has the potential to turn around this year. Every pundit is all over Khalil Mack. Mack had 15 sacks last year, but before we get too crazy we must remember that 5 came in one game (us) against the worst right tackle in football (Schofield) and Oz's worst performance (he refused to throw the ball away and took sack after sack that game). Mack looks like a great player but they're hanging their hopes on him like he's the next JJ Watt and Von Miller rolled into one. He's not.

They had one of the worst running games in the league and their secondary is suspect. Carr seems to be a decent QB and his receivers are pretty darned good, but unless they fix their running game and secondary, they'll be in the same position they were last year. Plus, Carr has to face Von, Ware and our secondary twice again. I'll believe the Raiders are better when I see it.

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

I hear this a lot, mostly from Broncos fans. What is it about him? It can't be a Wade Phillips comparison because Wade is on another level as a DC.

I personally am not wowed or dismayed yet. But on the flip side, he took over for a LOT of shitty coaches.

I think most people believe that he didn't do a very good job utilizing his personnel on defense.

Originally Posted by Jaded

The popular notion that Derek Carr is the best QB in the AFCW is utter bullshit.

I don't think that's a popular sentiment. Carr has the most upside atm, howe've Phyllis is the best in the division.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

I don't think that's a popular sentiment. Carr has the most upside atm, howe've Phyllis is the best in the division.

Yea, currently Rivers is the best but i think Carr has a huge upside and like him as a player.

Originally Posted by Cugel

What it really comes down to is that all the experts were wrong last year. They were all like Ben Maller - "I really think the Raiders have a great chance to overtake the Broncos this year! The Noodle Arm [Peyton Manning] is done! Their defense is good but it's not that good."

Then the Broncos won the division, the Raiders predictably failed again. But, they all rallied and predicted the Patriots would stomp them in the AFC Championship. Then the Broncos won and they all looked like idiots, but they took their revenge by predicting the Panthers would crush the Broncos in the SB. "They don't even deserve to be there. The wrong team won the AFC Championship Game!" - said Maller and he wasn't alone.

Then the Broncos won the SB making them all look like imbeciles once again. Of course they are predicting that the Broncos will go 7-9. They're angry at the Broncos for making them look like the fools they are. They keep predicting that the Broncos will lose, and yet perversely they keep winning. So, they get angry.

The problem was most people (including me) didn't think our D was SO great it could overcome an offensive line SO bad it crippled both our running AND passing. Certainly plenty of people asked plenty of pointed questions about how much was left in Mannings tank and when DT would stop dropping passes, but we had other WRs plus several solid (if unspectacular TEs,) and Manning had more than enough left to manage a game if he'd had decent protection or run support.

His departure changes none of that, and it's unclear that Vasquez and Cladys departure changes any of it for the BETTER, so the questions remain. They shouldn't, because our D just proved it actually IS so great it can singlehandedly win homefield and a SB as long as the QB isn't habitually catastrophic. But somehow people have gotten the idea our D couldn't be THAT good unless EVERYONE on it was elite, so Jackson, Trevathan, Bruton and Bolden are insurmountable losses.

They're not, but the proof is in the pudding. It just seems like the pundits would be once bitten, twice shy with the reigning champs.

Originally Posted by Devilspawn

I hear this a lot, mostly from Broncos fans. What is it about him? It can't be a Wade Phillips comparison because Wade is on another level as a DC.

I personally am not wowed or dismayed yet. But on the flip side, he took over for a LOT of shitty coaches.

Yes, but that also set the bar pretty low, and he still only barely and briefly got over it. I think Del Rio's much like Fox: He can make a garbage team respectable again, because he'll build a roster and teach it not to do anything obviously disastrous, but isn't the active difference maker who'll put anyone over the top.

It's weird how some coaches are great at building good teams but clueless about winning playoff games with them, while others could coach any SB team to victory against any OTHER SB team but couldn't build a decent roster if given the first 50 picks of a draft. Maybe it's as simple as a competitive team needing reliability but a championship team needing to take calculate risks. When 4-12, you don't want a guy reaching with the #3 overall pick, but predictability doesn't win playoff games.

Originally Posted by Jaded

The popular notion that Derek Carr is the best QB in the AFCW is utter bullshit.

Rivers for now.

Originally Posted by Joel

The problem was most people (including me) didn't think our D was SO great it could overcome an offensive line SO bad it crippled both our running AND passing. Certainly plenty of people asked plenty of pointed questions about how much was left in Mannings tank and when DT would stop dropping passes, but we had other WRs plus several solid (if unspectacular TEs,) and Manning had more than enough left to manage a game if he'd had decent protection or run support.

His departure changes none of that, and it's unclear that Vasquez and Cladys departure changes any of it for the BETTER, so the questions remain. They shouldn't, because our D just proved it actually IS so great it can singlehandedly win homefield and a SB as long as the QB isn't habitually catastrophic. But somehow people have gotten the idea our D couldn't be THAT good unless EVERYONE on it was elite, so Jackson, Trevathan, Bruton and Bolden are insurmountable losses.

They're not, but the proof is in the pudding. It just seems like the pundits would be once bitten, twice shy with the reigning champs.

They were bitten at the least four times. The regular season, Pitt, NE and Camolina as you are so fond of saying. They're pissed. Nothing will shut them up except a repeat. Why not?

Originally Posted by Joel

Yes, but that also set the bar pretty low, and he still only barely and briefly got over it. I think Del Rio's much like Fox: He can make a garbage team respectable again, because he'll build a roster and teach it not to do anything obviously disastrous, but isn't the active difference maker who'll put anyone over the top.

It's weird how some coaches are great at building good teams but clueless about winning playoff games with them, while others could coach any SB team to victory against any OTHER SB team but couldn't build a decent roster if given the first 50 picks of a draft. Maybe it's as simple as a competitive team needing reliability but a championship team needing to take calculate risks. When 4-12, you don't want a guy reaching with the #3 overall pick, but predictability doesn't win playoff games.

Sounds a lot like Phil Jackson.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

That's how I see it. I was disappointed with the way he started last year. It was the embodiment of a brain fart.

He did finish very strong, 32 touchdowns against 13 interception.