Key to 2014 Draft and Future of the Raiders!

[Tenebrous]

While I do not completely agree - great post. Yes, winning will improve a locker room, but coaching is just as important to winning as is a locker room - see Jackson's Raiders or Jackson's Lakers. Here, I agree with Dead - Sporano is the best coach the Raiders have on offense, if not the entire team.

With respect to Hundley and Bridgewater, I am also inclined to disagree with you. While I do not like either QB with a top 5 or even a top 10 pick, I wouldn't be opposed to drafting either in the 2nd or 3rd round. Problem is neither is likely to be there, especially Bridgewater, who I believe is benefiting from his light schedule. So, if the Raiders were to pick up Hundley - outside of their 1st pick - I would see that as a good move.

Hundley was a top QB prospect coming out of highschool in Arizona and could have played nearly anywhere he wanted, but chose to come to a program that was rebuilding. In my view, that speaks about his character - willing to take on a challenge, not choosing the easiest route. Yes, he needs polishing, but he will undoubtedly put in the work. Also, from watching many games on him, he is not mentally soft and he does not get down after making a mistake; I've seen him make a bad pass only to come right back in the next possession, make an adjustment, and get it right.

I wouldn't be opposed to taking either in the 2nd, 3rd rounds, etc. However, I was referring more to the 1st round pick. Hundely was certainly a top prospect, but he is far from finely polished. Therefore my point was to not take guys with so many question marks early on because this team doesn't have the needed culture to help these kinds of guys succeed.

Personally, I would not take a QB with a top 5 pick this draft. Indeed, I have argued several times that the Raiders should look for a monster pass rusher to compliment Houston with their 1st pick. Then, maybe, draft a QB so as to maximize value.

[Tenebrous]

We already have Terrelle Pryor on the roster. We don't need to draft his clone.

Ok, you must be joking. I have watched both play and they are two different players. Hundley is not the physical athlete that Pryor is - Hundley is a pass first quarterback that can run, Pryor is an athlete trying to learn to be a quarterback. That difference is notable.

Don't give me this "you must be joking" horseshit when you clearly haven't even looked into it.

Over his last 2 games Hundley RUSHED for 241 yds and 4 TDs. He passed for 434 yds and only 2 TDs. They won both.

The game before that against AZ State he only rushed for 5 yds and 0 TDs, and they lost.

Over the entire season he passed for 24 TDs and rushed for 11. Rushing yards accounted for 19.6% of his total yds from scrimmage.

By contrast Pryor threw for 7 TDs and rushed for 2. Rushing yds were 24.3% of his game.

But the real eye-opener comes when you take a look at Pryor's final season at Ohio State and compare it to Hundley's 2013. I'll give you three hints: a) in 2010 at Ohio State, rushing yards were 21.4% of Pryor's offense, b) he threw for 3 more TDs than Hundley and c) he rushed for only 4 TDs. Hundley relies even MORE on his legs to win than Pryor did.

You, sir, are delusional and it's very out of character for you. These are very similar players.

I haven't even looked into it? Lol, my opinions are not based just on highlightes or flacid stat sheets of both players, rather I follow both teams. I have seen Hundley grow from last season as saw Pryor digress this season. So why are you talking out of your ass?

Were you aware that UCLA lost two starting offensive lineman? Yeah, they were starting two true freshmen for much of the season and another offensive lineman was playing injured, so at times they had three true freshmen playing on the offensive line. To make matters worse, during the season, they lost just about all their running backs and were forced to put in a lineback at RB. How much protection do you think Hundley had with two or three true freshmen and a linebacker protecting him in passing plays? Yeah, this will not stand out of a stat sheet.

In short, the Bruin offense began and ended with Hundley. Stop Hundley, stop the Bruins and Hundley stepped up. The only losses UCLA had were to ranked teams - Stanford, Oregon, and Arizona State (this game they should have won!).

Meanwhile, Bridgewater loses to Central Florida and you would have the Raiders trade up to get him - a sub 200 lb QB who has benefited from a soft schedule.

Hundley is not a Vick or even Pryor, I can guarantee that, but he can run. His footwork in the pocket is better and while he can improve pocket awareness, he has shown noteable improvement over the past two seasons.

Seriously man, you need to check your arrogance.

[DeadRinger]

I haven't even looked into it? Lol, my opinions are not based just on highlightes or flacid stat sheets of both players, rather I follow both teams. I have seen Hundley grow from last season as saw Pryor digress this season. So why are you talking out of your ass?

Hundley is not a Vick or even Pryor, I can guarantee that, but he can run. His footwork in the pocket is better and while he can improve pocket awareness, he has shown noteable improvement over the past two seasons. Also, were you aware that UCLA lost two starting offensive lineman? Yeah, they were starting two true freshmen for much of the season and another offensive lineman was playing injured, so at times they had three true freshmen playing on the offensive line. Add to that, the Bruins were without their starting and backup RB. At one point, they lost just about all their running backs and were forced to put in a lineback at RB. How much protection do you think Hundley had with two or three true freshmen and a linebacker protecting him in passing plays? Yeah, this will not stand out of a stat sheet.

In short, the Bruin offense began and ended with Hundley. Stop Hundley, stop the Bruins and Hundley stepped up. The only losses UCLA had was to ranked teams. Again, can Bridgewater say the same? Nope. You marveled at Bridgewater's 77% completion rate in his bowl game, but ignored Hundley's 73% completion rate - however, Hundley as

Talking out of my ass?? Now you're just fucking pissing me off. I laid down great shit, and all you have are your subjective opinions about footwork and pocket awareness. IT'S ALL BULLSHIT!

So what was the situatipon with Pryor's team in 2010? I'm sure they didn't have any injuries, because no team ever does right?

This is fucking ridiculous, and you're full of SHIT. I'm done with it.

[bigboy3333]

There only 2 QB's is worth drafting in the top 5, that is Bridgewater and Johnny Manziel, either one would be starter from day one. it will be a major FUCK-UP" if they don't draft one or the other with there first pick.
Then build your team around one of those qb, with the remaining picks of the draft, such as OL,WR,DL,CB...I can live with our rb's one more year without Mcfadden!

They also need to make sure they have plenty of depth at these positions, OL,DL, CB, SS,FS,LB....which can be taken care once FA start .

The QB position need to be taken care of first...if not Raiders will be drafting in the top 5 for the next 4 to 5 years.

[Tenebrous]

I haven't even looked into it? Lol, my opinions are not based just on highlightes or flacid stat sheets of both players, rather I follow both teams. I have seen Hundley grow from last season as saw Pryor digress this season. So why are you talking out of your ass?

Hundley is not a Vick or even Pryor, I can guarantee that, but he can run. His footwork in the pocket is better and while he can improve pocket awareness, he has shown noteable improvement over the past two seasons. Also, were you aware that UCLA lost two starting offensive lineman? Yeah, they were starting two true freshmen for much of the season and another offensive lineman was playing injured, so at times they had three true freshmen playing on the offensive line. Add to that, the Bruins were without their starting and backup RB. At one point, they lost just about all their running backs and were forced to put in a lineback at RB. How much protection do you think Hundley had with two or three true freshmen and a linebacker protecting him in passing plays? Yeah, this will not stand out of a stat sheet.

In short, the Bruin offense began and ended with Hundley. Stop Hundley, stop the Bruins and Hundley stepped up. The only losses UCLA had was to ranked teams. Again, can Bridgewater say the same? Nope. You marveled at Bridgewater's 77% completion rate in his bowl game, but ignored Hundley's 73% completion rate - however, Hundley as

Talking out of my ass?? Now you're just fucking pissing me off. I laid down great shit, and all you have are your subjective opinions about footwork and pocket awareness. IT'S ALL BULLSHIT!

So what was the situatipon with Pryor's team in 2010? I'm sure they didn't have any injuries, because no team ever does right?

This is fucking ridiculous, and you're full of SHIT. I'm done with it.

You state that you have been shoveling "great shit", but great shit is still f'n shit.

Do you really believe you're being objective when you compare stats against basketball schools, or worse, to stats against ranked teams? Heck, even some of the non-ranked teams Hundley faced were arguably stronger football schools than the one's Bridgewater faced. You're delusional, you have to take his soft schedule into account when looking at his stats.

The fact is, in two seasons, Bridgewater has only faced one ranked team - a team that likely overlooked him no less. That is a problem when you are looking at stats.

Then you looked at Hundley stats, without taking into account offensive injuries in addition to ignoring strength of schedule. If you paid attention to what was going on you'd see that it's not surprising that he was forced to run more considering UCLA's offensive injuries this season, because run protection is a heck of a lot easier on lineman than pass protection. So when called upon Hundley stepped up and because he stepped up successfully, you want to use his success to attack him as another running QB.

You marveled at Bridgewater's 77% completion percentage in his Bowl game, but essentially dismissed Hundley's performance; the man had two passing touchdowns along with his two rushing touchdowns. More stats? Hundley's completion percentage was about 73% while gaining about 160 yards on the ground. Not a bad days work.

Did you watch Pryor in college? I'll be honest, I did not watch his games, maybe saw parts of a few games and highlights. Regardless, I am not sure what happened to him in 2010, but it is a fallacy to believe that because one answer is true in a situation, that same answer is true in all similar situations. It could be the case that Pryor's team had the exact same injuries which allowed him to hide his passing deficiencies, while those same injuries did not allow Hundley to showoff his passing strengths. So what is your point? Again, talking out of your ass it seems.

In defense of Bridgewater, you even made the false assumption that I do not even watch my own teams. What a crock.

I have been a UCLA fan for a while now and UCLA had a running QB before Hundley, his name was Prince. Did you see me post about him as I am about Hundley? No. Why not? Simple - he was strictly a running QB. UCLA's poor offensive line made it easier to hide his passing weakness, but in the end, he really could not move the ball through the air effectively. Hundley is different, he can and does strike through the air and ground. Is his game perfect? Heck no, not yet anyway. While his game is impressive overall, he has had a few poor streaks where his passes seem off for whatever reason.

On a side note, for what it's worth the guy behind Hundley is supposedly better - the rumor mill has raved about him. However, I have not seen him play.

Now, again, I am not stating that the Bridgewater will fail in the NFL or that Hundley is guaranteed to go to the Hall of Fame, only that niether QB is worth a top 5 pick. That being stated, it makes more sense to draft a monster pass rusher to compliment Houston with the first pick and then maybe draft Hundley with the 2nd pick (though that may be a gamble) than to trade up to get a QB that is virtually untested in college.

[790thSFS]

who cares about the college days! Most of those dudes turn out to be bust in the NFL anywayz

[Tenebrous]

who cares about the college days! Most of those dudes turn out to be bust in the NFL anywayz

It matters man, while each pick is a gamble to a substantial extent, seeing how a player performs in college will tend to lessen the gamble. For example, drafting Luck was not just luck - one could see what he did in college and then conclude that there was a strong chance he would succeed in the NFL.

[bigboy3333]

Dude u are fuck up!!!! why is it just U are down on Bridgewater, when everyone else scouts and all, has Bridgewater as the best QB in the 2014 draft.

I'm sure U have a answer.....

[Tenebrous]

Dude u are fuck up!!!! why is it just U are down on Bridgewater, when everyone else scouts and all, has Bridgewater as the best QB in the 2014 draft.

I'm sure U have a answer.....

... because, thankfully, I can think for myself. Besides, these same guys, that you would defer to, had Russell pegged as the best QB.

[bigboy3333]

Hell dude, i can only speck for myself, but do really think that DR and I are not capable of thinking for ourselves?....I don't necessarily go bye what others say, unlike U, I have follow Bridgewater ever since his sophmore year, and he only got better. Fuck your only reason, lack of competition! ( B S)

Specking of JaMarcus only Al Davis was the only one, that thought he was the next John Elway,I don't recall anyone else.....I for one thought and wanted the Raider to select WR. Calvin Johnson . Just one of many mistakes that AD made.

We have a saying in the south...No matter what U will (ARGUE with a sign Post)...and U definitely will try to have the last word....Now i see the conversation with you on the matter is pointless, I'm done and out.