remote controller 133 Posted June 26, 2007 It will still be Oakland. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grateful Parrot 0 Posted June 26, 2007 I chose Oakland. But I've got to say this thread has trouble listed all over it. Great job for offseason Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted June 26, 2007 Jeesh. I should have asked "who will be 2nd worst." The Raiders are too obvious. I vote Houston as 2nd worst. Matt Shaub who? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 26, 2007 The Raiders will finish about 6-10 and well ahead of the last-place team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ArnieBragg 1 Posted June 26, 2007 The Raiders will finish about 6-10 and well ahead of Dallas good call Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter34 3 Posted June 26, 2007 I think the Texans pick 1st next year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted June 27, 2007 Unfortunately I'm going to have to vote for my Titans Vince can't win every game by himself. Or can he? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Whynotme 0 Posted June 27, 2007 I voted for Cleveland but only because I want Dallas to have the #1 pick in the draft next year!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
49ers_suck 0 Posted June 27, 2007 The Raiders! they suck at every aspect of football! ok, their defense is alright. al davis needs to croak. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grateful Parrot 0 Posted June 27, 2007 Unfortunately I'm going to have to vote for my Titans Vince can't win every game by himself. Or can he? Joc ... How could you??? traitor. Won't be the Titans. If not Oakland, it will be Atlanta if Vick (the only offense they have) goes to jail. Titans will do better than them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
49ER MAN 0 Posted June 27, 2007 The Raiders! they suck at every aspect of football! ok, their defense is alright. al davis needs to croak. Al Davis doesn't need to die..just hand over the franchise to someone who knows what they are doing. The Raiders should finish with the worst record but something tells me they won't be as horrible as they were in 2006. Maybe the offense wakes up a little and helps out the D. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Corky76 2 Posted June 27, 2007 Here is the link to the help board. I am sorry to have to post this here but I need some info quick. I voted the Texans but I think that Nov.4th game between them and the Raiders should officially be dubbed the McFadden Bowl! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big_Pete 0 Posted June 27, 2007 I vote Oakland only because I think that they will start Russell, if not week 1, then by mid season. The only other team that I see as possibly being worse than them is Cleveland, but that's if, and only if they start Quinn for any extended period of time. (He'll be a bust to the tune of Ryan Leaf minus the attitude) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
softball 0 Posted June 27, 2007 I think the Texans pick 1st next year. I think you're right. And wouldn't be surprised if the thought of McFadden in the backfield is why they were willing to deal this season. I'm not suggesting they are going to "tank" the season. I'm suggestingthey have looked at who could be ahead of them wins wise and determined that if they have a poor season they again select at the top, giving themselves a chance at a stud RB to replace Ahman. That is just wild a.. speculation on my part, gotta have some fun. 3' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HenryChinaski 1 Posted June 27, 2007 Darren McFadden anyone? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Parja 0 Posted June 27, 2007 At this point, the pick's got to be Oakland. From what I've seen, they haven't improved at any position. Russell may be a stud some day, but he's too much of a project to help that team this year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RicemanX 20 Posted June 27, 2007 Like I said before the nfl draft... adding a star WR probably will not help you win too many more games, but adding a star QB will change your year. I choose the Lions with 3 or 4 wins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mozzy84 0 Posted June 27, 2007 alot of people are underestimating how bad the coaching in oakland was last year and how good there d really is, they will be in alot of games and actually win some of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted June 27, 2007 Al Davis doesn't need to die..just hand over the franchise to someone who knows what they are doing. The Raiders should finish with the worst record but something tells me they won't be as horrible as they were in 2006. Maybe the offense wakes up a little and helps out the D. Al's dead.........didn't you hear. He died year's ago and starred in the movie about Bernie...............He was Bernie. They just prop him up in his chair, by putting his elbows on his knees, and resting his chin on his hands. Every once in awhile, when the Raiders screw up, they either fling an arm up into the air, or they bury his forehead in his hands. The sweating is done with a mister from above. His one arm came plumb off two years ago and was sold on EBAY. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
listen2me 23 1,555 Posted June 27, 2007 Worst-Oakland 2nd Worst- Minny 3rd Worst- Texans However the Lions are the safest bet to be picking in the top 5 next year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RicemanX 20 Posted June 27, 2007 However the Lions are the safest bet to be picking in the top 5 next year. Yup, that's one of the safest bets you can take for the NFL next year. Oh, and maybe TO starting shiat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 27, 2007 At this point, the pick's got to be Oakland. From what I've seen, they haven't improved at any position. Russell may be a stud some day, but he's too much of a project to help that team this year. I'm surprised to hear you say that. Offensively, the Raiders have arguably improved at every position. QB: JMcCown/JRussell vs '06 ABrooks/'06 AWalter. Straight up, this would likely be a toss-up, straight-up. But remember, Walter took 70% of the snaps last year due to Brooks injuries. Walter had zero experience prior to last year and has much less talent than Russell, so I feel confident saying '07 Russell > '06 Walter and for that reason I expect better QB play in '07. Whether McCown is better than Brooks or not remains to be seen, but it's certainly possible. HB: DRhodes/LJordan/JFargas/MBush vs just LJordan/JFargas. Jordan only played 9 games last year. Not a huge improvement in terms of starter quality, but we should at least be able to bring two decent, healthy HBs to the game every week this year. FB: JGriffith/ZCrockett vs ZCrockett/JPFoschi. Crockett is getting long in the tooth and had little value beyond carrying the ball in short yardage. Griffith is a talented and versatile player who should be a perfect fit for Lane Kiffin's offense. WR1: JPorter vs '06 RMoss. Remember, Porter didn't play at all last year, and Moss half-assed the entire season. Remember Moss saying he was not happy enough to concentrate? Moss tied for 2nd in the NFL with 8 drops... in only 13 games! He caught 42 passes. The most drops was Andre Johnson with 11... but Andre caught 103 passes. On top of all that, Moss' speciality (the deep ball) was useless in an offense that couldn't pass protect. I think Porter will fit into Kiffin's offense perfectly, he's an NFL version of USC's Jarrett. Definite upgrade at the WR1 position, barry huge injury problems of course. WR2/3: RCurry/DGabriel vs RCurry/DGabriel. No difference here I guess. Curry and Gabriel combined for 9 starts last year. Curry is usually tehs lot guy. Gabriel was traded to New England early in the season last year and then came back to the Raiders at the end of the season. Hopefully there will be more continuity here this time, and Curry played 16 games for only the 2nd time in his career last year, so hopefully he has the experience to take the next step. WR depth: Travis Taylor/Johnnie Lee Higgins vs AWhitted. Definite improvement. Hopefully one of those two guys can push Curry and Gabriel. Last year's roster-fillers Alvis Whitted, Johnnie Morant, and Carlos Francis are back as well, for now. I guess we have Mike Wiliams now too. Whitted regrettably started 13 games last year, but might not make the roster this year. TE: ZMiller/CAnderson/RWilliams vs just CAnderson/RWilliams. Miller is a more complete and talented player than the guys Oakland has last year. Anderson has all the size you could ever ask for but hasn't panned out as a player. Williams is a WR/TE tweener. Miller isn't going to be a Gates or a Gonzalez, but he was the most highly-regarded TE in college football until Greg Olsen started running 4.5 40s in the offseason. LT: Barry Sims vs '06 Robert Gallery. I was never a fan of Sims at LT but in all his years playing the position (before '06), he still played better than Gallery did in '06. Stands to reason that moving him back to LT will be an improvement. LG: Jeremy Newberry vs '06 Barry Sims. I've heard people say the Raiders didn't do anything to improve their line this year, dozens of times, but apparently no one noticed the signings of guards Newberry and Cooper Carslisle. Newberry vs Sims is not a guaranteed improvement at LG, but it certainly is arguably an improvement. C: Jake Grove vs Jake Grove. This will be his 4th year, hopefully he will progress after getting 16 starts for the first time in his career last year. RG: Cooper Carlisle vs a huge mess including PMQuistan/KBoothe. The Raiders tried to plug in some cheap rookies at guard last year and it was a disaster. Definite improvement here, and more depth thanks to last year's rookie experience/experiments. RT: Robert Gallery vs '06 Langston Walker. I'm not going to call this one an improvement until I see it. But as much of a 1st-round bust as Gallery has been, Walker never panned out as a 2nd-round pick either. And Gallery goes back to the right side where he started ahead of Walker in '04 and '05. Now here's the rub: Head Coach: Lane Kiffin vs Art Shell. We don't really know what we have in Kiffin yet but if he does as bad a job with the team and particularly the offense as Shell did, I'll be shocked. Offensive Line Coach: Tom Cable vs Jackie Slater. Slater was a great player, but was a noob as a coach and all reports say the same thing... no one on the offensive line knew what they were doing and it was a big mess up there. Cable brings the zone blocking scheme with great credentials. Hopefully, Cable will make all 5 guys up front better. As for the defense, I'm not going to go into great detail there, but the Raiders had a fairly young defense and didn't really lose anybody, so there's room for improvement. I personally think their '06 performance was overrated by those who fall in love with their stats, but if we're comparing the '06 squad to the '07 squad, they could improve. The only real concern is some old guys on the defensive line, and the potential to have more injury problems on defense than they did last year. alot of people are underestimating how bad the coaching in oakland was last year and how good there d really is, they will be in alot of games and actually win some of them. Well said. Last year's coaching was not just bad, it was a joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dr. Octopus 0 Posted June 27, 2007 Miami. Trent Green is finished and in Jason Taylor's words has "scrambled eggs" for brains, their o-line is horrible, their D is aging and over-rated. They also play in a very tough division and I can see them going 0-6 there alone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted June 27, 2007 Miami. Trent Green is finished and in Jason Taylor's words has "scrambled eggs" for brains, their o-line is horrible, their D is aging and over-rated. They also play in a very tough division and I can see them going 0-6 there alone. I think Miami will contend for the playoffs in '07. Assuming of course that Trent Green doesn't get his brains splattered. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted June 27, 2007 It will still be Oakland. how could any other team get a vote? Worst O-Line int he NFL. Any rumors to the contrary are absurd. There's not a lick of talent on that O-Line. McClown, Walter or the rookie Russell (who was not worth 1.01, btw - they shoulda taken Calvin) - all terrible QBs Defense is decent, but the RB situation is a mess. Rhodes is the only viable starter on the roster at this point, what with the word that Bush won't be playing much if at all in 2007. "Bush required the insertion of a titanium rod in his leg and two surgeries to correct the damage from his injury. The Raiders aren't counting on much from Bush this season because they already have LaMont Jordan, Dominic Rhodes and Justin Fargas on the roster." Fargas is a mediocre RB at best, and used primarily on 3rd downs, while Jordan is overweight & recovering from a serious knee injury. Kiffen already stated that he'd be using Jordan/Rhodes as a 1-2 the way "NO uses McAllister/Bush) Regardless, I don't see either being tremendously productive with that O-Line. Raiders will finish 4-12, and will have the #1 overall pick in 2008. Raider fans should rejoice at that - they need it. I thought they were retarded for not dealing down. Russell is vastly overrated and had the Raiders not taken him at 1.01 I think he would have slid as far as Quinn did. Terrible pick, IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted June 27, 2007 100 VOTES!!! 51% Oakland 19% Cleveland 8% Minnesota 6% Houston 5% Detriot 4% Miami 4% Tampa Bay 2% Washington 1% Arizona ......................................................................................................... No shock. Oakland is the worst NFL team. Rookie QB, new coach, mediocre D (at best), no Randy Moss. They're toast. Cleveland - came in 2nd place, but Charlie Fry is more experienced and they signed J Lewis in the off season. I expect some improvement out of Winslow and the rest of Cleveland. But apparently a lot of yall don't. Minnesota - they have no big names on the team, but I think they're a little bit under-rated. (MIN D finished 3rd in my league) Houston - this was my vote for 2nd worst. Matt Schuab and the lowely Texans. I see bad things. Detriot - you'd think their offense alone will win SOME games. But then again, it's frikin Detroit. Miami - Not if Trent Green has anything to do about it! Tampa Bay - this team has problems, but also has a lot of big names. They'll suck, but won't be worst. Washington - no Qb. Old coach. Bad team. I could see Washington finishing last. Arizona - Ok fess up, who's the wise guy who picked Arizona? This ain't your daddy's Cardinals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 27, 2007 No shock. Oakland is the worst NFL team. Rookie QB, new coach, mediocre D (at best), no Randy Moss. They're toast. Let's break this down: "Rookie QB" - unlikely to start more than half the season "new coach" - why is that a bad thing? "mediocre D (at best)" - at best? I would say mediocre D likely. But a very good D at best. "no Randy Moss" - why is that a bad thing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted June 27, 2007 Let's break this down: "Rookie QB" - unlikely to start more than half the season "new coach" - why is that a bad thing? "mediocre D (at best)" - at best? I would say mediocre D likely. But a very good D at best. "no Randy Moss" - why is that a bad thing? This is called Rose Colored glasses Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 27, 2007 This is called Rose Colored glasses Which of my comments do you disagree with? And what's your reasoning? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted June 27, 2007 Which of my comments do you disagree with? And what's your reasoning? The organization is disfunctional. You can't do it with Rhodes, Curry, and a pass Defense. It's AL! I'm sorry t.j. Part of it is me being a smart a$$, and you don't deserve that. The statements you make might all be correct, but they amount to baby steps, and that only leads to starting to walk. They have a ways to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 27, 2007 The organization is disfunctional. You can't do it with Rhodes, Curry, and a pass Defense. It's AL! None of those comments relate to GobbleDog's comments on the Raiders, or my response to them (the response you called rose-colored). Thanks for nothing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted June 27, 2007 None of those comments relate to GobbleDog's comments on the Raiders, or my response to them (the response you called rose-colored). Thanks for nothing. Check my post out again. You just missed it. It's just opinion. They won't have enough this year. Check my above post out again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 27, 2007 I'm sorry t.j. Part of it is me being a smart a$$, and you don't deserve that. The statements you make might all be correct, but they amount to baby steps, and that only leads to starting to walk. They have a ways to go. I'll agree that it's baby steps. But when we're talking about who is going to be the worst team in the NFL, baby steps are significant. Any steps forward are likely to result in avoiding that dubious disctinction. If the discussion was about teams that have a chance to contend for the playoffs, then the standards would be higher. I agree they have a ways to go. You'll note earlier in the thread that I predicted a 6-10 season. Is that a rose-colored prediction? I suppose it would look that way in contrast to GobbleDog's outlook, which is focused on Moss, Russell, coaching turnover (and the assumption that coaching turnover is bad), and a questionable opinion of the defense (which is a minority opinion). The Raiders certainly have plenty of hurdles to overcome still, but I think GobbleDog is barking up the wrong tree with his assessment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted June 27, 2007 I'll agree that it's baby steps. But when we're talking about who is going to be the worst team in the NFL, baby steps are significant. If the discussion was about teams that have a chance to contend for the playoffs, then the standards would be higher. The Raiders have a ways to go for sure, you'll note earlier in the thread that I predicted a 6-10 season. Is that a rose-colored prediction? I suppose it would look that way in contrast to GobbleDog's outlook: Which is focused on Moss, Russell, coaching turnover (and the assumption that coaching change is bad), and a low opinion of the defense (which is a minority opinion). The Raiders certainly have plenty of hurdles to overcome still, but I think GobbleDog is barking up the wrong tree with his assessment. I still feel they are in the bottom of the bottom three, with the Texans, and the Browns. I really don' think they will ever truly step up until Davis is gone. Do you have a schedule handy where you can post the 6 they'll get? I apologize again for the way i posted above. I stated my views poorly. I am not a numbers, or an x's and o's type of fantasy guy. It's all gut, backed by last years team, and their trend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GobbleDog 822 Posted June 27, 2007 I suppose it would look that way in contrast to GobbleDog's outlook, which is focused on Moss, Russell, coaching turnover (and the assumption that coaching turnover is bad), and a questionable opinion of the defense (which is a minority opinion). The Raiders certainly have plenty of hurdles to overcome still, but I think GobbleDog is barking up the wrong tree with his assessment. I was just shooting from the hip and making a quick comment. Don't read too much into it. I was trying to reflect what a lot of people think: Raiders have made changes, but they still aren't going to win many games this season. Let's face it, they stink. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
godtomsatan 0 Posted June 28, 2007 alot of people are underestimating how bad the coaching in oakland was last year and how good there d really is, they will be in alot of games and actually win some of them. I totally agree and I think the Raiders are bunk. Minimum 6 wins in '07. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kitsnow 0 Posted June 28, 2007 Why isn't buffalo in this list? I feel cheated Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
