Offseason Decision #1

Lamont Jordan's Future with the Raiders?

  • Total voters
    21
Langlier

Langlier

Settle Down...
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
21,475
Reaction score
17,344
Lamont Jordan.

Keep, Trade, or Release?
 
If he has a $2.65 million option bonus coming due I think we cut him. But if the bonus is guaranteed or it doesn't exist I think we keep him.
 
I don't know what his contract details are, but I'm sure he's not going to be cheap. And I don't see him being worth much in a trade. Release him, and re-sign him if he'll do it cheap.
 
With a good line, him and Huggy bear can do some damage.

Plus, we're paying him a ton of money, so cutting him doesnt make that much financial sense, IMO.

Keep him.
 
He's getting something like $2.625M/yr in bonuses and has 3 to go. If we trade/cut him, we have to suck up that $7.9M. His salary for next year is pretty reasonable, so I don't see him being let go until the next season at the earliest.
2007 1000000.00
2008 4700000.00
2009 5000000.00

I wouldn't mind seeing him and Fargas as backups to Peterson/Lynch if they are all that they're hyped up to be.
 
Ok I did some homework on Lynch, and I what I saw of him.
I would love to see a back (lynch) come here and Light it up, but.....
My only issue with drafting a RB high is that I still think we need a linemen and a QB since I am not sold on our QB's and I am not sure who will be playing line......

So I would let him start next year and use the Draft pick on a QB or Lineman....
 
I have been thinking running back with our first pick BUT, I'm starting to waffle.

It's unfortunate we didn't pull the trigger on a QB in one of the last three drafts because we're right back in the same place now screwing up four straight seasons and still have no idea where we are going to go at QB. Brooks is obviously not the answer. Walter has shown nothing to indicate he is the future at the most important position on the field. Looks like Detroit may edge us for the #1 pick and they will surely take Brady Quinn so QB doesn't seem a good possibility in the draft --- especially since Al wouldn't do it anyway.

That leaves us with trying AGAIN to fix this OL. It's long been a strength on Raider teams since the beginning of time and it's the corner stone of a good offensive football team. As unsexy as it may be drafting another left tackle might be the right thing to do. Just sayin'.
 
I predict we'll keep him as the starter. Crockett isn't a young pup, and we like both Fargas and Lee as guys off the bench. I don't see that approach changing.
 
From a financial standpoint, it really doesn't make sense in letting him and he won't command anything on the trade market. He'll never be the franchise type back we've been lacking for so long. I'd still pull the trigger on AP or ML.
 
Is "no fucking idea" an option. Seriously, it's difficult to predict what Oakland will do in the best of times, this offseason..........
 
The man has already said he doesn't read the playbook and in my estimation has no desire to better himself, let alone do what it takes to be the best.

He just doesn't fit with any offense I can see the Raider's setting up in the future.

- Slow to the hole
- Drops too many passes to be a third down back
- Not fast enough to be an outside threat

- He runs hard if given a chance to get up a head of steam
- Protects the ball well

If he was a low $ player I would be in favour of keeping him. Unfortunately he doesn't fit the mould of leader and isn't a game changer. At his salary he has to be one or both of those things.
 
Move him into Crocketts role. RB depth is a major concern for me.
 
Madturk said:
From a financial standpoint, it really doesn't make sense in letting him and he won't command anything on the trade market. He'll never be the franchise type back we've been lacking for so long. I'd still pull the trigger on AP or ML.
Click to expand...
From a financial standpoint keeping him one more year is more than prudent. I'd still go after Peterson or Lynch too. Lee has shown he can play the FB position, so he can always slide over to make room as we phase Jordan out by making him the Bettis-type pounder. Drafting either of the young guns would probably revitalize Jordan and make him worth something in trade by the deadline.
 
O line is more important

Although I like AP and Lynch, I hope we do not draft a running back the first day. We need an O line first. They will make Jordon/Fargas/Lee/Crockett good enough , but we need to hide our deficiency at QB with a great line and give Walter a chance to learn without shitting his pants every play and getting his ego destroyed because of the line ineptitude. With Shell in Al's ear I think we draft OL early and often in 2007 - even if it means trading down out of #2.
 
Raider4Life said:
Although I like AP and Lynch, I hope we do not draft a running back the first day. We need an O line first. They will make Jordon/Fargas/Lee/Crockett good enough , but we need to hide our deficiency at QB with a great line and give Walter a chance to learn without shitting his pants every play and getting his ego destroyed because of the line ineptitude. With Shell in Al's ear I think we draft OL early and often in 2007 - even if it means trading down out of #2.
Click to expand...
I'd have to disagree with your draft strategy on the simple fact that our scouting department can't find the early talent or the coaches seem to kill them. Use FA to get established vets and get the skill players such as RB, TE, and possibly WR via the draft. Also, try to find a QB on day two that is a cross between Brooks (mobility) and Walter (arm strength) that can possibly take a chance to lead the team a la Tom Brady (unless we pick up a QB in FA to replace Tui).
 
Yeah, I'd die if we pass on a potential "playmaker" to go O-line. I think most of us have now come around to the idea that FA dollars need to go towards the O-line. Trades are also a possiblity.
 
I really wouldn't go mad if we decided to draft Oline again, though they better turn out to be the real deal and not take 3 years to get up to speed.
 
Limee said:
I really wouldn't go mad if we decided to draft Oline again, though they better turn out to be the real deal and not take 3 years to get up to speed.
Click to expand...
The offensive line has been the crux of the problem on offense. It all starts there and in our case generally ends there. The line has played better since moving Salughter to LT and Hulsey playing guard. Jake Grove is still a big problem at center. The guy isn't cutting it at the NFL level. And of couse we have #66. So fixing the offensive line is the first step toward keeping a QB upright in the pocket and giving our running game a much needed head start. Going OL in the draft early isn't the worst thing we could do. I know it's hard to stomach after the Gallery debacle but just like a running game if you give up on it early in the game you have no shot.

Additionally the FA market as somebody posted isn't deep with good prospects. I doubt seriously if we can attract the top two on the list and that leaves us with scrap heap marginal players to choose from. Hardly what we want to do as bad as this line has produced.

So, as much as I'd like to take the skill player at running back or wide receiver we'd probably be better served trading down and taking an offensive lineman or if necessary and the top OLman is a "can't miss" take him high again. After saying all that, yeah, we'll draft Johnson. But, building this team (again) around a WR is just flat dumb the way I see it.
 
CrossBones said:
So, as much as I'd like to take the skill player at running back or wide receiver we'd probably be better served trading down and taking an offensive lineman or if necessary and the top OLman is a "can't miss" take him high again. After saying all that, yeah, we'll draft Johnson. But, building this team (again) around a WR is just flat dumb the way I see it.
Click to expand...

I still think we can do both especially as high as we'll be drafting. Trade down and get the RB and use the lower first or high second on say Jake Long. We can use a mid rounder on a center, either HB's boy Satele or Doug Datish. I do agree, that drafting a wideout that high is just senseless.
 
Madturk said:
I still think we can do both especially as high as we'll be drafting. Trade down and get the RB and use the lower first or high second on say Jake Long. We can use a mid rounder on a center, either HB's boy Satele or Doug Datish. I do agree, that drafting a wideout that high is just senseless.
Click to expand...
That's the problem. It makes so much sense to trade down and try and get some team to over pay with draft picks and/or players BUT...you know the drill, Al doesn't trade down in the first round. There always has to be a first time though...we're using the shotgun so maybe Al will realize that CJ isn't going to make this team any better if the OL isn't fixed. We have about five months to wring our hands about this one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top