Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raiders a No Show at Oklahoma's Pro Day

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I see Huff and Mitchell spliting time like Huff and Eugene did this year.

    Im all for drafting Campbell if we trade out of the top 15. Taking him at 8 is just like taking DHB last year. We can land some more picks or players and get the guy Al wants.


    "Just Win Baby"- Al Davis
    @SirStackAlot707

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Paranoidmoonduck View Post
      Where the hell is this "unseating Michael Huff" **** coming from? The guy had a few interceptions early in the season, but he couldn't stave off Hiram Eugene for part of the season. He was far from a success last season.

      Now you're not giving Eugene enough credit. You could say that the reason Eugene has held onto a starting gig as long as he has might be in part due to a lack of better options, but not last season. Huff did remarkably well given the specific center-field type role he was asked to play on the majority of his snaps. Branch, as we know, had to play up at the line probably far more than he would've liked and the corners were always in single-man coverage. He really was the last line of defense for us, and he learned how to become a decent wrap-up tackler, all the while given us the pleasure of a few knockout blows in between. Huff is not the problem on defense and, because of that, there is zero reason to test out any more inexperienced DBs in platoon-like roles until they're capable. Mitchell is not an upgrade unless he miraculously developed upon his instinctual play to go with his blazing speed. Instincts were never in question for Huff, look at the college tape; it was more of trusting what he was seeing with him. Eugene was simply a better option for us on running downs, however, thatís not to say that Huff couldnít succeed in that role, just not with the way the defensive front seven was structured in front of him.

      Also,



      This is patently false. Campbell was actually quite a good pass protector at Maryland but largely failed to drive very well on running plays. Playing him on the right side would be pretty damn silly, he either becomes a decent starter on the left side or he's a total bust.

      I'll leave this as is; we obviously have differing views on this and it's not likely to change. Iíve heard opinions ranging on either side, in the end Iím going to trust what Iíve seen. The bottom line is that it boils down to fundamentals and work ethic to improve upon said fundamentals. As of right now, there aren't any "red flags" as it pertains to his character that I'm aware of. If so, please let me know.
      Responses in bold.

      Comment


      • #18
        - What I'm reading is that Huff is a decent talent who is far from well suited for the Oakland defense. And it is my opinion that Mays would likely be viewed as perfectly suited for the defense. I'm still not clear at which point switching between Huff, Eugene, and Mitchell starts to appear like an attractive option that couldn't be improved upon. Since Oakland decided to tender Eugene with a 2nd rounder, that probably places Mays a bit further down the line, but I'm not seeing the wealth of talent that would preclude the possibility of Mays.

        - I know that the metrics on Bruce Campbell's run blocking were quite overwhelming, even he admits that most scouts feel that Campbell doesn't finish his blocks all that well or drive men off the ball. He has experience in a zone blocking system, so maybe his ability to pull and move will be attractive to Tom Cable (assuming he manages to keep the ZBS in 2010).

        Comment


        • #19
          From earlier reports this off season they said we are likely to move back to a power blocking scheme and Campbell doesnt fit that. Okung, Bulaga, Davis or Williams are capable of playing LT in the new scheme if the reports are true


          "Just Win Baby"- Al Davis
          @SirStackAlot707

          Comment


          • #20
            Okung or Davis would probably make the most sense in that case, but Okung will be gone and I'm not the biggest Davis fan in the world.

            Part of me is curious what would happen if the Rams take a QB and the Lions decide they don't need a DT more than an OT and go for Okung. What if McCoy or Suh fell to 4 or 5. How loudly would you be yelling at your television "TRADE UP"?

            Comment


            • #21
              if Suh or McCoy is on the board a 4, what would we have to give the Skins?
              Taking a Knapp.

              Comment


              • #22
                Jamarcus? Haha...

                I'm not sure what it would take to move up into the top 5 from a top 10 pick. A 3rd rd pick plus #8?

                Sig by fenikz! Cheers!
                Originally posted by Scott Wright
                Mr. Dukes comes from the Michael Irvin "talk loud and maybe people will think I know what I am talking about" school of football analysis.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Probably a 3rd rounder plus some sort of pick from the dwindling 2011 stack, probably a 3rd or 4th rounder. If Suh or McCoy were there, it'd be totally worth it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    does anyone like Jimmy Clausen? I do. I think its a 1% chance we would draft him, but if we was on the board I would call JaMarcus and say your cut and draft Clausen. :)
                    Taking a Knapp.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by NIN1984 View Post
                      does anyone like Jimmy Clausen? I do. I think its a 1% chance we would draft him, but if we was on the board I would call JaMarcus and say your cut and draft Clausen. :)

                      I'm a ND fan and I hate Clausen.....

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by NIN1984 View Post
                        does anyone like Jimmy Clausen? I do. I think its a 1% chance we would draft him, but if we was on the board I would call JaMarcus and say your cut and draft Clausen. :)
                        I like Clausen more than Bradford. He is more of a for sure thing coming from a pro style offence and already have good size, arm strength and accuracy. He wont ever be Peyton Manning but he should be a good starter in the NFL. I doubt we cut JaMarcus though


                        "Just Win Baby"- Al Davis
                        @SirStackAlot707

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I could see us cutting JaMarcus right before the start of the season when Bruce is named the starting QB, kinda like what the Jags did a few years back with their former top pick, Leftwich.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yeah now would be the time to do it, with it being an uncapped year. I'm not quite ready to write him off completely yet though. I'll admit it has always taken me awhile to write off highly drafted players, from Brees to Harrington and Carr. As long as we keep both of them around, Bruce will for sure be working his ass off and Russell will be well, just chillin.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I would have no problem drafting Clausen and cutting Juggs.

                              Then we would have QB's on the roster who have talent, are smart, and will work hard to be the best.

                              Clausen is a better QB right now than Juggs.....easily.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information