Reply With Quote
you'll never see Rosenthal say a good thing about the Raiders. Nothing new.
Carr Wreck
you'll never see Rosenthal say a good thing about the Raiders. Nothing new.
Carr might not be Ja-Carr-cus Russell after all, GG
To be a guy who follows a team that has never won you sure do like to around with those teams that have.
The Raiders are a far more important team that the Chargers. Then there's all those Hall of Famers.
Little man, don't you ever get tired of trying to with everyone?
Carr was 21/12 td/int, Geno a woeful 13/13.
Last edited by Avante; 04-02-2015 at 10:09 PM.
You are kidding, right?
Just saving CN a post tbh....
I doubt he even knew that. I've tried to talk Tobin Rote, Paul Lowe, Keith Lincoln, Lance Alworth with the boy, he can't do it.
He's posted that same image several times...anytime somebody tells him that the Chargers have never won anything.
The good ole pre-superbowl days tbh.
Don't care how "important" old gots think they are, the Raiders have still been the rag of the NFL for over a decade now.
That 63 Chargers team was a great team, they scored 399 points in only 14 games. Lowe averaging 5.7 a carry, Lincoln 6.5. Rote the top passer in the league.
Last edited by Avante; 04-02-2015 at 11:14 PM.
You never look at the big picture do ya son? No clue about what important even is. The Raiders a three time SB champ with a ton of HOF players. The Chargers have to go way way back to the days of Tobin Rote to have a little glory.
And why ignore the fact Carr went 21=12 while Geno totally sucked at 13-13?
the raiders have been bottomfeeders for a decade now... so they dont really deserve too much benefit of the doubt. but if anybody actually watched Carr's body of work, and didn't pick and choose their games (good or bad), they'd know he played reasonably well for his cir stances.
he didn't shine in many advanced stats, and outside the TD/INT ratio, his raw numbers weren't very good either. what he did show was poise, mental resolve, and a good arm. his numbers were going to be bad because the raiders over the course of the season had the least talented offensive skill players in the NFL. the run game was historically inefficient for the first 10 weeks of the season, and our #1 receiver was James Jones
i haven't found an updated version of this chart, but it was pretty telling. its no surprise the raiders got wins against KC/SF/Buffalo when Latavius Murray was involved in the run game...
Too bad all those HOF'ers are retired, since they suck so bad in the present.
I'll try again, why ignore Carr's 21-12 vs Geno's 13-13? Dude, in his rookie season (like Carr) Geno was 12-21!!! 21ints.
How about Philip Rivers, Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady as "ROOKIE" QB's vs Carr?
Dude, you compare the same stage of a career, ok?
Rookies, sheesh~~~~
Why ignore that the comparison was about the tape, not the stats?
Why ignore the fact we have a second year QB vs a rookie? You have any idea at all how rare it is for a guy to step right in and start his first 16 games? I thought you were into context? You wanna compare Carr vs Geno as rookies, trust me you don't.
Dude, why this need to go around seeing who you can bug, it sucks guy, ok?
Joe Montana played in only 8 games his first two seasons, he was 16-9 td/int. Derek Carr has started off better than Montana, Rodgers, Brady, Favre, Rivers and.......Geno Smith.
How about the greatest Raider QB ever, yep, Kenny Stabler? In his first 3 seasons he started how many games? How about 5tds and 8ints?
Last edited by Avante; 04-02-2015 at 11:09 PM.
Which poster is this?
What I saw of Carr, he had a poise and composure that was far better than most rookies. Didn't ever seem to get rattled, and considering the chaos and inep ude surrounding him, that was really impressive. Obviously, that doesn't mean anything if he doesn't improve, but honestly I liked him a whole lot more than any other rookie QB.
yeah, basically. its not like he had a spectacular rookie campaign, but he looked the part. what concerns me is that the raiders didn't get him any weapons in FA, and with all the mariota trade talk, there's a good chance leonard williams will fall to 4, and even though there are some dynamite receivers, they won't pass up on him.
going into next season with our only help being a 2nd round pick is going to be tough sledding for Carr. maybe they'll be able to run better to take pressure off, and an improved defense could mean we wont need to abandon the run by halftime
if it gets to a point where Carr regresses, would set the team back another 2-3 years. but after a decade, whats another few years...
If only you used this open minded thought process while evaluating Camthe raiders have been bottomfeeders for a decade now... so they dont really deserve too much benefit of the doubt. but if anybody actually watched Carr's body of work, and didn't pick and choose their games (good or bad), they'd know he played reasonably well for his cir stances.
he didn't shine in many advanced stats, and outside the TD/INT ratio, his raw numbers weren't very good either. what he did show was poise, mental resolve, and a good arm. his numbers were going to be bad because the raiders over the course of the season had the least talented offensive skill players in the NFL. the run game was historically inefficient for the first 10 weeks of the season, and our #1 receiver was James Jones
i haven't found an updated version of this chart, but it was pretty telling. its no surprise the raiders got wins against KC/SF/Buffalo when Latavius Murray was involved in the run game...
?
I don't think this is debatable to say Raiders are more important than chargers tbh
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
