So what in the world is happening with the Raiders?

kobebryant":157s3bir said:

With the job security that that contract gives him I think him and Mark Davis are planning for Vegas.

The folks in Oakland, and Marshawn too, have every right to be pissed that they've decide not to field the most competitive team possible in their remaining time in Oakland.

Click to expand...

Fade":3b39beal said:

I like what Jon Gruden is doing. Seriously not joking.

The Raiders defense was garbage with Khalil Mack. So there was no point in paying him, if you can get a king's ransom in return. And they did.


They can now rebuild their defense with FOUR 1st rd picks over the next two years. $60-70M in cap space next off-season to spread around to some vets. Individually none of these acquisitions will be better than Mack, but collectively they will be a much, much better team. This move will allow them to contend for years to come.

Belichick trades overpriced players all the time and no one bats an eye. The Pats traded Chandler Jones to AZ for much less, and Jones has totaled more sacks than anyone since moving to AZ. AZ has sucked, NE has been going to Superbowls.

Casuals will overreact negatively to this trade. Sort of how the casual media & public is overreacting to the Seahawks losing a bunch of big name washed up defenders this off-season that hardly contributed last year anyway. Save for Bennett he is the only legit loss to the defense, but even he was trending downward, and was a locker room problem.


Tom Cable is the only worry I have for the Raiders. The quicker they fire him the better.

Khalil Mack Trade Grade

Raiders: A-
Bears: B-

Click to expand...

Fade":36a0swen said:

I like what Jon Gruden is doing. Seriously not joking.

The Raiders defense was garbage with Khalil Mack. So there was no point in paying him, if you can get a king's ransom in return. And they did.


They can now rebuild their defense with FOUR 1st rd picks over the next two years. $60-70M in cap space next off-season to spread around to some vets. Individually none of these acquisitions will be better than Mack, but collectively they will be a much, much better team. This move will allow them to contend for years to come.

Belichick trades overpriced players all the time and no one bats an eye. The Pats traded Chandler Jones to AZ for much less, and Jones has totaled more sacks than anyone since moving to AZ. AZ has sucked, NE has been going to Superbowls.

Casuals will overreact negatively to this trade. Sort of how the casual media & public is overreacting to the Seahawks losing a bunch of big name washed up defenders this off-season that hardly contributed last year anyway. Save for Bennett he is the only legit loss to the defense, but even he was trending downward, and was a locker room problem.


Tom Cable is the only worry I have for the Raiders. The quicker they fire him the better.

Khalil Mack Trade Grade

Raiders: A-
Bears: B-

Click to expand...

getnasty":1nb8f82w said:

I agree with this. People forget not only did Chicago have to part with picks they also had to pay a ton of money for Mack.

Click to expand...

uncle fester":1yjffblq said:

There’s a lot of talk centered around the four First Round picks in two years being a win in this trade.

This is the Raiders.

They have bombed on every single First Round pick in the last fifteen years, outside of Mack. Those who weren’t outright busts went on to be, at best, stunningly mediocre.

Yes, those picks weren’t all the work of one GM, but the trend hasn’t changed with McKenzie so to think it will suddenly improve with the change of an area code is perhaps a tad optimistic, don’t you think?

Click to expand...

Sgt. Largent":bp8s1qq8 said:

As much as I think Gruden may be the most overrated coach in the history of the NFL, I can understand his logic in not wanting to pay Mack crazy 22M a year type of money.

That means between Carr and Mack, you've got over 40M of your cap tied up in two players...............AND if you're not convinced that you're in the mix to win a SB, why commit to that much salary.

If you believe in your scouting, McKenzie and your coaches to use the two #1's wisely to reload and go into moving to Vegas with a strong young nucleus to compete for the next 4-5 years? Then it's a good trade.

Everyone's all over Gruden, but very rarely does this type of trade work out for the team that overpays for the player. So we'll see how the Bears do this year, and over the next two without a first round pick.

Click to expand...

mrt144":3v6p120u said:

Sgt. Largent":3v6p120u said:

As much as I think Gruden may be the most overrated coach in the history of the NFL, I can understand his logic in not wanting to pay Mack crazy 22M a year type of money.

That means between Carr and Mack, you've got over 40M of your cap tied up in two players...............AND if you're not convinced that you're in the mix to win a SB, why commit to that much salary.

If you believe in your scouting, McKenzie and your coaches to use the two #1's wisely to reload and go into moving to Vegas with a strong young nucleus to compete for the next 4-5 years? Then it's a good trade.

Everyone's all over Gruden, but very rarely does this type of trade work out for the team that overpays for the player. So we'll see how the Bears do this year, and over the next two without a first round pick.

Click to expand...

The way I look at it, the Bears are still gonna be that mishmash of 'wut?!' with or without Mack. It's the Raiders perspectives and motives that I just can't reconcile as easily. I do appreciate the responses to the thread though for giving me perspective though.

Click to expand...

Sgt. Largent":1g4d3hll said:

mrt144":1g4d3hll said:

Sgt. Largent":1g4d3hll said:

As much as I think Gruden may be the most overrated coach in the history of the NFL, I can understand his logic in not wanting to pay Mack crazy 22M a year type of money.

That means between Carr and Mack, you've got over 40M of your cap tied up in two players...............AND if you're not convinced that you're in the mix to win a SB, why commit to that much salary.

If you believe in your scouting, McKenzie and your coaches to use the two #1's wisely to reload and go into moving to Vegas with a strong young nucleus to compete for the next 4-5 years? Then it's a good trade.

Everyone's all over Gruden, but very rarely does this type of trade work out for the team that overpays for the player. So we'll see how the Bears do this year, and over the next two without a first round pick.

Click to expand...

The way I look at it, the Bears are still gonna be that mishmash of 'wut?!' with or without Mack. It's the Raiders perspectives and motives that I just can't reconcile as easily. I do appreciate the responses to the thread though for giving me perspective though.

Click to expand...

For sure, it doesn't make any sense from the Bears side. They're still in rebuild mode, and have no idea if Trubisky is even a good starting QB.

Why give up two #1's for a DE, who will help............but puts you NOWHERE near the Vikings or Packers in your division.

My point is Gruden is being crucified, and I really don't understand it. I love Mack, he's an elite DE, but I wouldn't want the Hawks to pay 22M a year to a DE crippling our cap either.

Click to expand...

mrt144":3u4grrvm said:

A Raiders fan put it to me like this: Would you give up a winning lottery ticket for 4 lottery tickets? I know that doesn't cover the nuance of the situation at hand but it's kind of where I am at - you have a great known quantity, and it has a lot of upkeep expenses, but...you're banking on hitting at 2/4 on those picks to meet or exceed that known quantity 3 to 4 years down the road? If this was not Mack and say Frank Clark I'd take the picks no doubt but I think Mack is great and even if his salary demands are a bit outlandish, taking a proactive approach to set the table 3-4 years down the road is just too unknown. Of course I also have my doubts on Gruden lasting even 5 years let alone 10 to realize his vision so that tinges it.

Click to expand...