AtomicCEO Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Even though Miami's signing of Long seemed to be an even more foreboding sign that Al may pick McFadden... I could no longer resist. I just drafted Michael Bush in the 22nd round of the dynasty league on spec-a-lashun. Backup DL, 3rd string TE, Kicker, or Michael Bush... I go with Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 Even though Miami's signing of Long seemed to be an even more foreboding sign that Al may pick McFadden... I could no longer resist. I just drafted Michael Bush in the 22nd round of the dynasty league on spec-a-lashun. Backup DL, 3rd string TE, Kicker, or Michael Bush... I go with Bush. 22nd round? Im kinda surprised he lasted that long... Just 2 years ago he was a stud at Louisville. I know he broke his leg, but I would think someone would take a flier sooner than 22nd round. I think you might have just gotten yourself what I like to call a steal. PS - Im high on Bush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byron2112 Posted April 23, 2008 Share Posted April 23, 2008 So youre saying that they should draft McFadden even though they dont need him, but they shouldnt drafty Gholston because they DO need him? I just have 1 question... What the f**k are you TALKING about?! Reading comprehension is crucial you mofo. A backfield of Fargas and Bush with Rhodes comming off the bench is adequate to good.... Meaning I wouldn't pass on a superstar RB that can score everytime he touches the ball and strike fear in defenses. The Raiders offense has no playmakers, and really doesn't have much overall speed, so Mcfadden brings things to the table that don't currently exist there although they do have a backfield that can move the chains for the most part. Gholston I just don't have much reguard for. He's the highest risk/reward player probably in the entire 1st round, and even if he did work out to be a better passrusher than the likes of Kalimba Edwards and Chris Clemons he's not going to do anything to improve the Raider run defense. I'd prefer Chris Long and Dorsey over McFadden, as they're both complete defenders, but I don't believe either will be there. McFadden over Gholston all week long and twice on Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 Reading comprehension is crucial you mofo. A backfield of Fargas and Bush with Rhodes comming off the bench is adequate to good.... Meaning I wouldn't pass on a superstar RB that can score everytime he touches the ball and strike fear in defenses. The Raiders offense has no playmakers, and really doesn't have much overall speed, so Mcfadden brings things to the table that don't currently exist there although they do have a backfield that can move the chains for the most part. Gholston I just don't have much reguard for. He's the highest risk/reward player probably in the entire 1st round, and even if he did work out to be a better passrusher than the likes of Kalimba Edwards and Chris Clemons he's not going to do anything to improve the Raider run defense. I'd prefer Chris Long and Dorsey over McFadden, as they're both complete defenders, but I don't believe either will be there. McFadden over Gholston all week long and twice on Sunday. I comprehend everything youre saying, but no matter which way you spin it, McFadden is not a good pick for them. You said they have the players to move the chains. so if thats the case, what do you need the "home run hitter" for? Sure it might help put a few more butts in the seats, and might make them a little bit more fun to watch, but you have to STOP other teams first. They have a good back in Bush, and they should at least spend this season using him to see if he will work out. They arent doing anything this year anyway. Every draft has a stud RB. They will likely have a top 10 pick next year, and if Bush doesnt work out, they can draft one next year. They need to work on their defense before they do anything else with the offense. How much do they have in cap space anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 They have a good back in Bush good backs in Jordan and Fargas, and they should at least spend this season using him to see if he will work out. They arent doing anything this year anyway. Every draft has a stud RB. They will likely have a top 10 pick next year, and if Bush doesnt work out, they can draft one next year. They need to work on their defense before they do anything else with the offense. How much do they have in cap space anyway? Fixed. I don't see how you can call a guy that hasn't taken a snap in 2 years and hasn't even sniffed the field in the NFL a "good back". He's nothing more than a young player with potential at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 The way I look at is. I hope they draft a DE. But in reality if its not Chris Long. They need to take McFadden. I am not sold on Gholsten. To be honest. They are really just one piece away on Defense anyway. They need that DE yes they do. But at the same time. McFadden could make that offense dangerous and that always keep your D fresh by them not being on the field much. Remember now. They got one of the baddest on paper secondaries in the league. Another DE would be icing on the cake. But a move the chains and home run hitter would be better. To me either way it goes they will be ok. But I am not sold on Gholsten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 The way I look at is. I hope they draft a DE. But in reality if its not Chris Long. They need to take McFadden. I am not sold on Gholsten. To be honest. They are really just one piece away on Defense anyway. They need that DE yes they do. But at the same time. McFadden could make that offense dangerous and that always keep your D fresh by them not being on the field much. Remember now. They got one of the baddest on paper secondaries in the league. Another DE would be icing on the cake. But a move the chains and home run hitter would be better. To me either way it goes they will be ok. But I am not sold on Gholsten. On defense they could also take Sedric Ellis and keep Kely on the edge. Ellis would be a nice replacement for Sapp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 Fixed. I don't see how you can call a guy that hasn't taken a snap in 2 years and hasn't even sniffed the field in the NFL a "good back". He's nothing more than a young player with potential at this point. How many snaps has McFadden taken in the NFL? My point was that they drafted Bush for a reason. They need to give him a chance to show what he can do, and if he doesnt cut it, then yeah, they have Fargas/Rhodes/Jordan/etc. Bush was as good as McFadden before he got hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 How many snaps has McFadden taken in the NFL? My point was that they drafted Bush for a reason. They need to give him a chance to show what he can do, and if he doesnt cut it, then yeah, they have Fargas/Rhodes/Jordan/etc. Bush was as good as McFadden before he got hurt. McFadden didn't have to have his leg reconstructed. and BTW, I have already said the Raiders shouldn;t draft McFadden. but not because of Bush. Because of the whole group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 McFadden didn't have to have his leg reconstructed. and BTW, I have already said the Raiders shouldn;t draft McFadden. but not because of Bush. Because of the whole group. I have a question. Would you rather have the group of RB's Raiders have. Or LT or All day in his prime. I know that he hasn't played a down yet. But what if he turns out to be that type of player. He has the makings of it. (Darren McFadden I am referring too.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 I have a question. Would you rather have the group of RB's Raiders have. Or LT or All day in his prime. I know that he hasn't played a down yet. But what if he turns out to be that type of player. He has the makings of it. (Darren McFadden I am referring too.) 1) There is no guarantee that McFadden's career will even sniff LT's and 2) Your question can't exist in a vacuum. If I can have the current RBs and add an impact player on defense, I would probably choose the latter. RBs are short lifespan, high risk picks. They get hurt a lot and do not pan out at as high a rate as other position, particularly defensive positions. If Oakland can't run the ball with the players they have, McFadden isn't going to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 By the way....I wonder if people forget the argument 2 years ago about Mario Williams versus Reggie Bush. Williams is turning into a defensive stud and Bush is proving out to be a fragile scat back. You never know with RBs. Take the defensive stud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 By the way....I wonder if people forget the argument 2 years ago about Mario Williams versus Reggie Bush. Williams is turning into a defensive stud and Bush is proving out to be a fragile scat back. You never know with RBs. Take the defensive stud. Glad u stated that. I was one of the very very few that stated Williams was the pick and NOT Bush. Matter of fact I passed on bush with the 1.1 pick I had that year. But by no means is Gholsten, is Mario Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 Glad u stated that. I was one of the very very few that stated Williams was the pick and NOT Bush. Matter of fact I passed on bush with the 1.1 pick I had that year. But by no means is Gholsten, is Mario Williams. I am guessing that Glenn Dorsey or Chris Long will still be there, as per my draft contest selection. If not, I think the Raiders need to do what they can to get down to Baltimore's spot, because the only way one of those 2 is not there is if ATL doesn't draft Matt Ryan...which IMO would be colossally stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 I am guessing that Glenn Dorsey or Chris Long will still be there, as per my draft contest selection. If not, I think the Raiders need to do what they can to get down to Baltimore's spot, because the only way one of those 2 is not there is if ATL doesn't draft Matt Ryan...which IMO would be colossally stupid. I can't see them taking Dorsey. They have a lot of money tied up in their DT's. Sands and Kelly. Those two will be pretty good together. Sands is a IDP to watch out for as well if you use DE and DT separately in your league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 I can't see them taking Dorsey. They have a lot of money tied up in their DT's. Sands and Kelly. Those two will be pretty good together. Sands is a IDP to watch out for as well if you use DE and DT separately in your league. If Dorsey is there, Kelly can stay at DE. It's an option.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalboyd Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 If Dorsey is there, Kelly can stay at DE. It's an option.... That is very true. But I think he was more effect as a run stuffing DT. But that is an option to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted April 24, 2008 Share Posted April 24, 2008 What the Raiders need, more so than any defensive player on the planet, is a player that can "change" the complexion of the offense and team as a whole. It is very possible that McFadden is this type of player. Gholston is not. Bush/Rhodes/Fargas. Are you serious?? Is that combo EVER going to help them WIN?? Quite simply, no. There is no assurance that McFadden is that guy, but he sure could be. If the Raiders want to change the culture of losing, they have to take on a chance on a guy they could hit a homerun with, not a guy that is a sure single up the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 1st rd draft busts are a dime a dozen. There is as much a chance that Bush is a stud as there is McFadden's. As we remember, Reggie Bush was supposed to be the best RB out of college since Gayle Sayers. So why not draft for need instead of flash? Not saying Al will, but the Raiders need D-Line and thats what they should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 Maybe Al is a genius, and this is all a ruse to get other people to trade up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 1st rd draft busts are a dime a dozen. There is as much a chance that Bush is a stud as there is McFadden's. I don't disagree about Bush. The kid could be good. McFadden is special. That is the difference. There is a much higher chance that McFadden is a franchise player than Michael Bush. There is also a higher chance tghat McFadden is a franchise changing player than any other player on the board at this point. True, there are a lot of first round busts. That said, there is tons of recent evidence to show that when a young stud rookie RB does pop, the franchise pops right with him. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Russell & Fargas and maybe Michael Bush can win games? I don't care what defensive lineman you take, that offense is in trouble. The best player on the board is McFadden, and he also fits the biggest need for the Raiders....an offensive playmaker. I repeat, this is the biggest no-brainer of the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 What the Raiders need, more so than any defensive player on the planet, is a player that can "change" the complexion of the offense and team as a whole. It is very possible that McFadden is this type of player. Gholston is not. Bush/Rhodes/Fargas. Are you serious?? Is that combo EVER going to help them WIN?? Quite simply, no. There is no assurance that McFadden is that guy, but he sure could be. If the Raiders want to change the culture of losing, they have to take on a chance on a guy they could hit a homerun with, not a guy that is a sure single up the middle. Thats right... Youre the McFadden locer. You made a bet, but failed to agree on terms. You have some crazy love for McFadden, but youre scared to place the bet you swear is an easy win for you (McFadden top 5 back this year, no matter where he goes). And how does McFadden have a "higher chance" of succeeding than Bush? Did you see Bush play in 06? He was rated as high as McFadden. It was the broken leg that dropped him down, and its been 2 years since that happened. Bones heal. Bush has AS MUCH A CHANCE AS ANY RB to be great. He hasnt ran a down in the NFL, so its all a gamble. Me? Id rather take a chance on a hugh back like Bush (since he is already on the team) than on a back like McFadden who has legs the size of mine. Time will tell, but Id put my money on McFadden being Reggie Bush part 2 - Skills dont live up to the hype. Now, if you wanna revisit that bet, PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 Maybe Al is a genius, Stop. Atomic, re-read what you've typed above. You need to take a good long hard look at yourself, and ask, "Self? Do I really want to be the only person on the face of the Earth to wonder whether Al Davis is a genius?" There are some really good prescription medications available these days you know. You can be helped Atomic. But you have to WANT to be helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 That said, there is tons of recent evidence to show that when a young stud rookie RB does pop, the franchise pops right with him. What is the evidence of which you speak? I think the examples that you come up with will show you need much more than just a rb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peepinmofo Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 What is the evidence of which you speak? I think the examples that you come up with will show you need much more than just a rb. I bet his "evidence" is the fact that AP came in last year, lit it up, and the Vikings were that much better. What AP had nothing to do with though, was the defense. Sure AP made that offense, but the defense made the team win a couple more games. So yeah, Id like to see the "evidence" he refers to as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts