2020 Regular Season Roster and Depth Chart

007 said:
We all just pick where and when it fits hahaha.

Dominique Rodgers Cromartie and Jordy Nelson are both Alumni.

Fuck em both.
Click to expand...
Nothing says we don’t get to un-invite people either. But for those who want to remain tied to the organization, the saying reflects how Marc feels about them. In contrast, Kroenke could give a shit.
 
Sleet said:
Not at all. Stupid, really.

Williams is an active player; he did not retire. If a player opts out, retired or not, that’s on him.

I don’t think you guys understand how alumni programs work. Or are just butt hurt.
Click to expand...
Or maybe..... having watched Mack and Cooper get their super-sized second contracts somewhere else..... Maybe we’re no longer naive enough to think players will automatically be lifelong Raiders......

That said, a Raider alumni program has to be more than an open door policy...... It can’t be..... let’s just go ahead and take whoever shows up at the door...... We’re not running a strip club..... this is supposed to be a football team....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 007
No bigger fail this offseason then letting TW's contract go guaranteed. There's simply no excuse for Grudock to have allowed that, could have easily moved on and/or replaced him with no difficulty. They had ALL THE LEVERAGE and did absolutely nothing with it. Why? Makes zero sense. This guy wasn't 'irreplaceable' or anything close to it. They should have pulled the plug and either forced him to take what any other team would have paid after an injury filled year, which would have been half of what he's making, or just replaced him with Anderson or Emanuel. What a monumental fail. Completely unforced error.
 
1-800-Raider said:
Or maybe..... having watched Mack and Cooper get their super-sized second contracts somewhere else..... Maybe we’re no longer naive enough to think players will automatically be lifelong Raiders......

That said, a Raider alumni program has to be more than an open door policy...... It can’t be..... let’s just go ahead and take whoever shows up at the door...... We’re not running a strip club..... this is supposed to be a football team....
Click to expand...
They gave Melenik Watson a ceremonial brick for the new stadium
 
Black Sundays said:
No bigger fail this offseason then letting TW's contract go guaranteed. There's simply no excuse for Grudock to have allowed that, could have easily moved on and/or replaced him with no difficulty. They had ALL THE LEVERAGE and did absolutely nothing with it. Why? Makes zero sense. This guy wasn't 'irreplaceable' or anything close to it. They should have pulled the plug and either forced him to take what any other team would have paid after an injury filled year, which would have been half of what he's making, or just replaced him with Anderson or Emanuel. What a monumental fail. Completely unforced error.
Click to expand...
Or maybe Williams had an injury guarantee, and was still recovering from his injury on the 3rd day of the new year, when his contract became fully guaranteed, you know, like he said. Williams did not recover from his foot injury until a week or so before camp.
 
Sleet said:
Or maybe Williams had an injury guarantee, and was still recovering from his injury on the 3rd day of the new year, when his contract became fully guaranteed, you know, like he said. Williams did not recover from his foot injury until a week or so before camp.
Click to expand...
Link? Never heard that once. He was able to play, so what exactly was an injury guarantee supposed to protect? Was he covered just because his feet hurt? What's that a new perpetual clause you get to claim forever? That's nonsense, he was HURT, not injured, and he played through the discomfort. No way he was protected by any injury clause. Common sense.
 
Black Sundays said:
Link? Never heard that once. He was able to play, so what exactly was an injury guarantee supposed to protect? Was he covered just because his feet hurt? What's that a new perpetual clause you get to claim forever? That's nonsense, he was HURT, not injured, and he played through the discomfort. No way he was protected by any injury clause. Common sense.
Click to expand...
Why would you shit on a guy that had played hard for you?
 
Welsh Raider said:
Why would you shit on a guy that had played hard for you?
Click to expand...
They paid him $11mil to be a decoy and do almost nothing. If THAT'S shitting on a guy, sign me up. They owed him squat.

He owed THEM a contract restructure for being ineffective nearly the entire season and getting his full paycheck to do it.

Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice...
 
Black Sundays said:
They paid him $11mil to be a decoy and do almost nothing. If THAT'S shitting on a guy, sign me up. They owed him squat.

He owed THEM a contract restructure for being ineffective nearly the entire season and getting his full paycheck to do it.

Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice...
Click to expand...
I'd say that all of that is your perspective, taken out of context and with the benefit of hindsight.

You're saying they paid him $11m to be a decoy - they didn't. They paid him $11m to be a receiver. Who got injured - it happens. He didn't do it on purpose and he didn't fuck the team over.

The guy signed a contract. Then he was injured. They could have shut him down for the year but instead given Brown having walked out and the cupboard being bare and Williams having already adapted his role, he played through it. Didn't make any comments or complaint at any stage. Carried on playing when others might not have done so.

This year, he got fit. Then had another unrelated injury. Shit happens. And it'll likely mean he's gone next year. But you can't claim knowledge of the this injury when judging decisions about the contract in January.

Now technically, they could have cut him without any issue. You're right. But what kind of message would that send? You are saying that the player should take on all of the risk of an injury and that the team shouldn't have to pay them a dime if they get injured playing football. That's ridiculous.

Elsewhere on here there is a discussion about Trent Brown. About how he has no real need to stay next year and how given he is carrying an injury he might be avoiding playing and causing himself issues next year. I have no idea of the truth of that suggestion, but what I do know is that you cut Williams in January in the way that you characterise it then there's a fucking long queue of players headed by Brown saying, fuck you with your telling us that we owe you $11m for getting an injury and fuck asking us to play through pain.
 
Black Sundays said:
Link? Never heard that once. He was able to play, so what exactly was an injury guarantee supposed to protect? Was he covered just because his feet hurt? What's that a new perpetual clause you get to claim forever? That's nonsense, he was HURT, not injured, and he played through the discomfort. No way he was protected by any injury clause. Common sense.
Click to expand...
You can look up what a contract being guaranteed for injury means yourself. You are the one making the argument that smart people did stupid things. Sure it’s possible. But it’s your burden to support your argument, not mine. Or you can continue to be miserable and howl at the moon.
 
Black Sundays said:
He owed THEM a contract restructure for being ineffective nearly the entire season and getting his full paycheck to do it.

Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice...
Click to expand...
You just make stuff up to fill holes in your arguments? You win. That’s the dumbest post all day.
Congratulations. :chuckle:
 
Black Sundays said:
They paid him $11mil to be a decoy and do almost nothing. If THAT'S shitting on a guy, sign me up. They owed him squat.

He owed THEM a contract restructure for being ineffective nearly the entire season and getting his full paycheck to do it.

Fool me once, shame on you. But fool me twice...
Click to expand...

You're kinda like the Brandon Parker of Black Reign. You haven't really shown much promise to this point. We all hope you'll improve, but we also know it's unlikely to happen.

It's probably Gruden's fault you haven't developed. Fucking guy ruins everything.
 
Welsh Raider said:
I'd say that all of that is your perspective, taken out of context and with the benefit of hindsight.

You're saying they paid him $11m to be a decoy - they didn't. They paid him $11m to be a receiver. Who got injured - it happens. He didn't do it on purpose and he didn't fuck the team over.

The guy signed a contract. Then he was injured. They could have shut him down for the year but instead given Brown having walked out and the cupboard being bare and Williams having already adapted his role, he played through it. Didn't make any comments or complaint at any stage. Carried on playing when others might not have done so.

This year, he got fit. Then had another unrelated injury. Shit happens. And it'll likely mean he's gone next year. But you can't claim knowledge of the this injury when judging decisions about the contract in January.

Now technically, they could have cut him without any issue. You're right. But what kind of message would that send? You are saying that the player should take on all of the risk of an injury and that the team shouldn't have to pay them a dime if they get injured playing football. That's ridiculous.

Elsewhere on here there is a discussion about Trent Brown. About how he has no real need to stay next year and how given he is carrying an injury he might be avoiding playing and causing himself issues next year. I have no idea of the truth of that suggestion, but what I do know is that you cut Williams in January in the way that you characterise it then there's a fucking long queue of players headed by Brown saying, fuck you with your telling us that we owe you $11m for getting an injury and fuck asking us to play through pain.
Click to expand...
If they cut a player who is recovering from an injury, whose contract is guaranteed for injury, they are going to get a grievance filed against them, it seems to me. Do you win that grievance, IDK. But it gets filed. And it sends the wrong message as a franchise like you point out. Williams’ value on the FA market is reduced, heck he likely can’t even get signed until he works out and passes a physical, which he can’t do until he recovers from his foot injury. Isn’t that the point of an injury guarantee?

So, play it out. Williams does not get signed by another team until camp when he has recovered and can pass a physical or at least practice. We get an offset, a grievance for the difference, and an anti-player reputation.

Al supported and paid players. Heck, Al paid that WR who got mugged in Vegas and who offered to give his guaranteed money back. Al said no. His reputation for paying and supporting players (and, of course, not admitting a mistake) meant more to him.

You are arguing with someone with little or no perspective. He’s just howling at the moon.
 
Last edited:
Crow said:
You're kinda like the Brandon Parker of Black Reign. You haven't really shown much promise to this point. We all hope you'll improve, but we also know it's unlikely to happen.

It's probably Gruden's fault you haven't developed. Fucking guy ruins everything.
Click to expand...
:chuckle:
 
Sleet said:
If they cut a player who is recovering from an injury, whose contract is guaranteed for injury, you are going to get a grievance filed against you. Do you win that grievance, IDK. But it gets filed. And is sends the wrong message as a franchise like you point out. Williams’ value on the FA market is reduced, heck he likely can’t even get signed, until he works out and passes a physical, which he can’t do until he recovers from his foot injury. So, team Williams does not go signed until camp with another team. We get an offset, a grievance for the difference, and an anti-player reputation. Al supported and paid players. Marc is following his father’s footsteps. Heck, Al paid that WR who offered to give his guaranteed money back who got mugged in Vegas. Al said no. You are arguing with somehow with little or no perspective.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'd assumed any justification for them cutting him would be non-performance, but as you say, essentially it would have been an injury cut.

On the broader note, the notion of being a 'pro-player' team is a no-brainer, it seems to me. At least avoiding treating players like crap should be.

I listened to Ross Tucker's podcast for a couple of years (got out of the habit now) and as an ex-player, one of his common complaints was about how players were cut. I can't remember the details, but coming up to one of the contract confirmation deadlines in Feb-April time, he would always ask 'why do teams hold on to players until the deadline? What would releasing them a week earlier to give them an early chance at free agency cost the team? You know you're cutting them.'

Seemed to me that there are a few very simple steps that a team could take to be regarded as a team that was positive and did right by players and would cost the team zero in competitive edge. And while at the very least that couldn't hurt (and was true to the Raiders' team legacy), it might also maybe help a tiny bit in the battle for free agents in the future.
 
Welsh Raider said:
Thanks. I'd assumed any justification for them cutting him would be non-performance, but as you say, essentially it would have been an injury cut.

On the broader note, the notion of being a 'pro-player' team is a no-brainer, it seems to me. At least avoiding treating players like crap should be.

I listened to Ross Tucker's podcast for a couple of years (got out of the habit now) and as an ex-player, one of his common complaints was about how players were cut. I can't remember the details, but coming up to one of the contract confirmation deadlines in Feb-April time, he would always ask 'why do teams hold on to players until the deadline? What would releasing them a week earlier to give them an early chance at free agency cost the team? You know you're cutting them.'

Seemed to me that there are a few very simple steps that a team could take to be regarded as a team that was positive and did right by players and would cost the team zero in competitive edge. And while at the very least that couldn't hurt (and was true to the Raiders' team legacy), it might also maybe help a tiny bit in the battle for free agents in the future.
Click to expand...

I have no issues with TW. He grew up a Raider fan and his dad was a season ticket holder. Unfortunately he couldn't stay healthy during his brief tenure here. Raiders chose to pay him what they did. Its a small window to make your money in the NFL. I can't begrudge the guy or question his work ethic. It just didn't work out.
 
We paid him about a million bucks a catch.

Fuck that guy too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top