jsull87
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,748
- Reaction score
- 110
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Heh! What's in been ~ 8 years?? ~ since the last time the Raiders were penciled in for a win??
7 and 9 seems likely, yes, and their Strength of Schedule edge will likely be VITAL to us, as they could be a in an EIGHT way tie, the way things are going!!
......................
Heh! Yeah, I just went over everything, and while Oakland COULD, theoretically, push all the way down to 7th or 8th, there's no way in HELL that happens.
More likely, they inch forward to about #13.
What's funny...is that, come Week #17, the Patriots are looking straight in the FACE of an amusing conflict:
Miami is currently tied with the Raiders at #14, albeit with Oakland's Pick having a distinct Strength of Schedule advantage...
Considering that the Patriots will very likely have the #1 seed wrapped up, by then...I'd like to offer my services as Starting QuarterBack for that week's game!!
The more and more I think about the Raiders pick.. I would be comfortable being anywhere from 9-12
Here is why.. The chances of 4 Qb's going early is very high with
Luck
Locker
Mallett
Newton
Being there for teams like SF / WAS / Car/ Cin / AZ / Buff / Minny
That being said that leaves the rest of the Blue Chips to be there or at the very least a very nice piece of bait for someone wanting an elite talent..
From Espn Draft Central
1. Patrick Peterson* CB LSU 98
2. Da'Quan Bowers* DE Clemson 97
3. Marcell Dareus* DT Alabama 97
4. Robert Quinn* DE North Carolina 96
5. A.J. Green* WR Georgia 96
7. Prince Amukamara CB Nebraska 96
8. Nick Fairley DT Auburn 95
9. Adrian Clayborn DE Iowa 94
Either way we get someone who can help our team significantly via playing or trading..
So bottom line is we need Oakland to be in the 9-12 range.. for this to happen..
Would love to see that, but I'm skeptical. Definitely see Luck and Mallett in this group. Locker is possible but I'm not counting on it. He looked inept in home games against Nebraska, Stanford and UCLA. Not all his fault, but still. I could see him sliding into the 2nd round. Newton has all the hype which I hope shoots him up into this group. One-year-wonders tend to be the guys that bust in the first round despite their talent level...and busting on a QB in the 1st round gets you unemployed really fast.
I would take Clayborn off the list for the Pats since I'm not sure he is a fit. The other 7 are right on as the elites in the draft. Add in Luck and Mallett and that gets you to a sure-fire stud if you are top 9 or better. The Pats won't get there unfortunately. Their ceiling seems to be #13 with a very outside chance to get as high as #11.
That means the Pats need some unlikely players to jump into the top 12. Locker and Newton are 2. No team at the top is RB-needy enough to take Ingram and outside of Green I can't see another WR going top 12. The OL candidates are weak so it is unlikely someone will reach on Castonzo or Sherrod. The front 7 on defense is the best hope for the Pats. Teams could see real scheme fits for Clayborn, Bailey, Paea or Miller and reach for them. Much like Alualu for the Jags last year and that turned out OK for them.
I'm still holding out hope that one of the top 6 defenders from your list above will slip to the Pats. Any one of them would require special attention from the opposing offense, making the job for the rest of the Pats defense easier. There are still plenty of talented players for the picks at #32, #33, #64 and #74...but getting one of the handful of elite talents in this draft would be sweet for a team that is already winning and on the rise.
I'm still holding out hope that one of the top 6 defenders from your list above will slip to the Pats. Any one of them would require special attention from the opposing offense, making the job for the rest of the Pats defense easier. There are still plenty of talented players for the picks at #32, #33, #64 and #74...but getting one of the handful of elite talents in this draft would be sweet for a team that is already winning and on the rise.
I agree completely. Which is one of the reasons why this year, and this year only, I'm on the "trade up" bandwagon. I'm not counting on a Wilfork-like slip; I want to make it happen!