DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum 2017 Free Agents by position , starting with QB's

You can't count 2006 as an indicator of Vickers' usefulness. He was switching from RB at colorado to FB and Terrelle Smith got all the snaps at FB that year.

I think we're closer in our thinking than it appears. I agree about the higher end, impact players. But I think that is going to be our standard. If there isn't anyone like that or we can't land them, then that's it.

Now I think we will sign some depth guys, rotational type guys, or seeing as how they seem to love reclamation projects, one or two of them to kick the tires on. But those lower tier players and projects I don't think many people consider as "active in FA".

I guess the best example I can think of at the moment to illustrate where I'm coming from is that I don't think we'll be signing guys of Demario Davis level talent and automatically penciling them in as a starter like we did with him.

Well, by in large, older high-priced vets are in FA. Those good players from teams are retained. Do some slip through the cracks? Sure. (ex. Schwartz) but if team likes a player, they'll normally find a way to keep him. There are some instances where a team doesn't have enough money and needs to make choices on who to let hit the FA market (Osweiler), but again, many players heading to FA are not of the 25-26, leaving their first contract, all-pro variety.

I just think there are more instances where FA signings have hurt teams more than it's helped them. Those who have more sustained success focus resources elsewhere. And those where it helped were maybe a piece or two away from SuperBowl aspirations. We're obviously not there.

Am I of the all or nothing type? No, but you are probably on the right track because I am far more weighted on limiting FA activity or not spending significant $$.

VICKERS!!! VICKERS!!! VICKERS!!!

My point still stands, in the NFL today, you do not need a fullback to run the ball successfully.

Death to the full back. Put a dline or a guard in there. There's no reason to save a roster spot for a unicorn who won't even come. Like Peen says, you have to take trends into account. No one has a FB anymore. The only teams that actually use a full back are D2 pro offenses or D1 teams still running the triple option. Give that roster spot to where we need it.

That was last year my friend. I don't think any commentsd made precludes us from signing a player or two. I don't think our FO is blind to filling holes with veteran players.


Let's see how this year goes.

We have money, a boatload of picks, and a year under the belt.


I think we will incorporate a few FA to fill some voids.

I'd be happy if we just kept our guys.

That may be, but your post was deceiving.

We'll see, peen..........but I think the Browns would be more likely to spend money on marketing than on signing free agents.

NRTU

Deceiving only to those who missed the POINT. His POINT was about the FB position and it's effectiveness. The FB position - whether he be Vickers or Smith - 'led' the team to those rankings...there's nothing deceiving about that post unless the posted stats are wrong - which I doubt.

I prefer the H-back type and I think Hue does too. Hence, Viatle in and M Johnson out.

That may be the only thing that happens. I'd like another starting DB and maybe even an OT - depending on what is really going on with S Coleman. However, I am pretty uninspired by that FA list...not saying there is no help there. Then again, I may be blinded by the lack of viable QBs on that list.

If we could get Cousins that would be awesome

I have always thought he was an underated QB in the league.

of course if we go that route we will need an OL to protect him

.. " We'll see, peen..........but I think the Browns would be more likely to spend money on marketing than on signing free agents...
______________

Now there is a statement to hang your hat on !

The other side to that is, if we don't start winning marketing does not matter. Pick your poison.

Just a bunch of money hungry has bins! Not sure of my spelling but it is phonetically correct. JMHO.

j/c:

Man, the Raiders are such a great example of how getting good players through free agency ruins a team. While the Browns are kicking butt by not doing the same.

I really hope next year we focus on getting some veteran guys to guide the team a bit. I know that most veterans are losers, but still. Some culture has to be better than cutting teeth like this.

I dont wont a veteran just to have one.. I want one that is actually gonna impact this team in the win column. Dont care the age. Just win.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/14392099/how-oakland-raiders-created-bright-future-nfl

1. Clear out a horrifically mismanaged salary cap.

In Al Davis' final years, the Raiders ran their cap with all the budgetary foresight of a college freshman. Players like DeAngelo Hall were acquired and signed to above-market extensions, then waived when they inevitably failed to live up to expectations, leaving the Raiders with a perennially unwieldy salary cap.

When McKenzie arrived before the 2012 season, the Raiders were coming off an 8-8 season that was less impressive than their .500 record might indicate, given they had been outscored by 74 points. They were also capped out, having spent nearly $126 million against the $123 million cap during the 2011 season. The Raiders were then more than $30 million over the cap heading into 2012. With a veteran team and limited upside, McKenzie had to make a painful decision.



Over the next two seasons, McKenzie took a scythe to the veteran contracts clogging up Oakland's roster, eating the short-term pain of accelerated cap hits for long-term freedom. The depths he had to plumb may never be repeated by an NFL general manager. His Raiders swallowed $73.9 million in dead money for players removed from the roster over the next two seasons, including a staggering $55.4 million during the 2013 campaign. The Raiders had only 4 during the 2013 season, which would have undoubtedly made them the first team in league history to devote more cap space to players off the roster than the guys who were actually in uniform on Sundays.

McKenzie's insistence on cleaning up the balance sheet dwarfed the rest of the league; not only was that $73.9 million the most dead money racked up by any team over the 2012 and '13 seasons, but the second-place Jaguars were another universe away at $50.4 million. And in many cases, McKenzie was right, as the veterans he let go -- known quantities like Richard Seymour, Stanford Routt, Tommy Kelly and Michael Huff -- are now out of football. (There's one notable exception that we'll get to later.)

Only now, with 2016 approaching, can the Raiders truly begin to see the fruits of McKenzie's efforts in this field. They have $16 million in dead money on this year's cap and $15.1 million in cap space. Next year, the Raiders are ticketed to have a mere $420,000 tied up in dead cap money. They'll be able to carry over that $15.1 million in space and have just $77.4 million committed to the top 51 players on their roster. Even factoring in new deals for Donald Penn, Aldon Smith, J'Marcus Webb and the ageless Woodson, the projected $150 million cap line would leave the Raiders with $75 million or so in cap space this offseason. That figures to be more than anybody else in football.

2. Hoard draft picks.

Just as the Raiders had sacrificed their balance sheet to fruitlessly chase competence, they simultaneously dealt away the one thing that could have gotten them out of cap hell: draft picks. McKenzie inherited a team missing draft assets. Its 2011 first-round pick was missing from the roster, having been dealt to the Patriots for Seymour, with Bill Belichick using the pick to draft franchise left tackle Nate Solder. Later during that same draft, the Raiders sent their 2012 second-rounder to the Patriots for picks near the very end of the third and fourth rounds, which were put to use for Joe Barksdale and Taiwan Jones, the former of whom was cut after one season. (Belichick picked on the Raiders like no other team in football before McKenzie arrived.)

The Raiders followed up by sending their 2012 first-round and 2013 second-round picks to the Bengals to acquire Carson Palmer during the middle of the 2011 campaign. Palmer was acquired to replace Jason Campbell, who the Raiders had picked up by sending a 2012 fourth-rounder to Washington. That left McKenzie without three of his first four picks in the 2012 draft and his second pick in the 2013 draft. Not exactly promising, especially given that the lack of talented players leaving Oakland were going to make it exceedingly difficult for the Raiders to rack up any compensatory picks.

McKenzie comes from Green Bay, where general manager Ted Thompson kicked off his rebuild of the Packers' roster by trading down in 19 of his first 21 draft-pick trades. The vast majority of research suggests that no team is appreciably better at drafting talent than the rest of the league and that the best way for teams to find talent is to accrue as many picks as possible.

It should be no surprise, then, that McKenzie has followed in those footsteps. He has made seven pick-for-pick trades during his four years as Raiders general manager, and in each of those trades, he has dealt down to acquire additional picks. Using Chase Stuart's draft-value estimates, the cumulative impact of those seven trades has been to generate draft capital akin to the 85th overall pick, meaning McKenzie has manufactured a third-round pick out of thin air.

That's the abstract value, but in reality, McKenzie won virtually all of these trades. His biggest trade down was also his best, when he dealt the third overall pick to the Dolphins in 2012 so Miami could grab Dion Jordan. McKenzie's return on the 12th (D.J. Hayden) and 42nd (Menelik Watson) picks hasn't been great, but you would rather have either player than Jordan, who has been suspended for the 2015 season after violating the NFL's substance abuse policy. Other trades have led him to the likes of Mychal Rivera, Gabe Jackson and Latavius Murray, and the best player McKenzie has missed out on with one of the picks he dealt is probably Buccaneers linebacker Kwon Alexander. He has done well here.

3. Build through the lines.

As much as NFL personnel swear by building from the lines out, very few teams actually put their money where their mouth is. McKenzie's Raiders team is one of the rare exceptions. Although he hasn't invested much in free agency, McKenzie's few dips into those oft-infested waters have been to rebuild on either side of the line of scrimmage.

McKenzie has gone into the free-agent pool repeatedly here to come away with veterans, even if it has meant overpaying. The Buccaneers cut left tackle Donald Penn, and that gave McKenzie his left tackle on a two-year deal. Emerging Jets tackle Austin Howard got a five-year, $30 million deal with the Raiders and moved inside to guard, only to bounce back out to tackle this past offseason. McKenzie attempted to add the aforementioned Saffold, only for that deal to fall through. Then he finished the line this past offseason by giving Chiefs center Rodney Hudson a five-year, $44.5 million deal.

Those three veterans are among the six largest cap hits on the Oakland roster. The second-largest cap hold belongs to nose tackle Dan Williams, signed this offseason from Arizona. A two-year, $11 million deal went to former Giants star Justin Tuck, who failed to live up to his former promise before going down with a torn pectoral muscle at midseason. McKenzie also made a big offer to Jared Allen, who chose the Bears instead. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

You can take issue with some of these moves or doubt the Raiders extracted incredible value -- and that's understandable -- but you can see a coherent plan. McKenzie wanted those offensive linemen in place for the most important part of any rebuilding plan ...

4. Find the right quarterback and don't reach for the wrong one, even if it means some lean years.

Missing high draft picks and finding himself without a clear path to an obviously great option, McKenzie was forced to spend the first two years of his term with the Raiders in an awkward spot. The new general manager inherited Palmer and saw him deliver a relatively anonymous season in 2012, one in which he combined league-average traditional statistics as a 33-year-old with a 25th-place finish in QBR.



McKenzie promptly made the worst trade of his run, foisting Palmer off onto the Cardinals in an April 2013 salary dump for a sixth-round pick and a conditional selection. That trade looks absolutely awful now, for multiple reasons.

Although Palmer has flourished, it would be naive to suggest he would have followed the same upward path in Oakland, especially given how many veteran players have revitalized their careers in Arizona under Bruce Arians. At the time, Palmer was an aging quarterback on a going-nowhere team with an injury history who wasn't playing at an especially high level. McKenzie was probably too quick to dump Palmer for pennies on the dollar, but it's pure hindsight to suggest anybody thought the Raiders GM had an MVP candidate on his hands.

The other reality is the Raiders had no way to find a quarterback in 2013. Look at the group. Not a starter to be found. So McKenzie sent a sixth-round pick in March 2014 to the Texans for Matt Schaub. Schaub was bad in 2013 but one year removed from making the Pro Bowl. That's the sort of risk bad teams should take. Sometimes it leads you to Schaub and Trent Richardson; other times, you end up with Michael Crabtree for peanuts.

Fortunately, McKenzie found a quarterback he liked one month later in the 2014 draft, taking Carr in the second round with the 36th pick. It was a high-risk selection, given quarterbacks taken in the top of the second round often fail to launch, with the likes of Jimmy Clausen, John Beck and Drew Stanton as disappointing recent examples. When Carr outperformed Schaub during August, McKenzie and Allen handed him the starting job.

Carr was truthfully overrated during an underwhelming rookie season. His reputation was buoyed by a couple of very impressive games in front of larger television audiences and an otherworldly (and totally unsustainable) performance in the red zone. There were plenty of reasons to be skeptical of Carr as a future starter heading into 2015.

Instead, he has passed those tests with flying colors. Carr has taken strides in every facet of his game, making fewer mistakes while executing a far more difficult offense. His numbers are up across the board, with just one weird quirk coloring things. As Stuart noted a week ago, Carr has a bizarre split. He has posted a league-best 111.1 passer rating and 71.3 QBR through the first three quarters of games in 2015, which would make him the seventh-best passer in football if he could just keep it up. Instead, he has been a disaster in the fourth quarter, where he is 32nd among 33 qualifiers by passer rating (62.3) and QBR (17.0).

Carr was far better in the fourth quarter last season than he was over the first three (18th in QBR vs. 31st), so there's little reason to think this is much more than a total fluke. His second season profiles something like Kerry Collins' sophomore campaign, and that might not sound especially impressive, but Collins was a top-five pick who made the Pro Bowl and came one game from the Super Bowl that season before drinking temporarily destroyed his career.

Carr's rookie deal is an incredibly valuable proposition, and a little patience helps. Rebuilding general managers often don't have the chance to find a worthy quarterback. Take John Idzik in New York, who rightfully moved on from Mark Sanchez, cleared out cap space and hoarded draft picks, just like McKenzie. Idzik never had a path to a quarterback and used a second-round pick on Geno Smith as a likely placeholder, only for Smith to struggle and Idzik to promptly lose his job. Idzik got two years; McKenzie is on his fourth.

5. Nail your picks at the top of the first round.

Easier said than done, of course, but McKenzie has come away with two franchise players at the top of the past two drafts. It's impossible to definitively say Mack is the best player out of a draft with Odell Beckham Jr. and Aaron Donald, but Mack's five-sack game publicly announced an arrival that occurred sometime last season. Mack is a terror of a pass-rusher, and even that sells short his ability to hold up in coverage and defend against the run. The list of players who accrued 14 or more sacks as second-year guys, as Mack has this season, is all superstars.



Getting Mack was good fortune, and it seems to have happened again. In desperate need of a No. 1 receiver for Carr, the Raiders found one in Cooper, who has been a godsend for his young quarterback, even if he has dropped 9.2 percent of his targets this year. Combining with the resurgent Crabtree and a pair of other young talents in Seth Roberts and Clive Walford, Oakland suddenly has a set of weapons for Carr. Pass-rushers, cornerbacks and wide receivers were the highest-paid positions on the free market this past offseason, and it's no coincidence McKenzie's initial three first-rounders come from those very positions.

6. Find the right coach.

It's harsh to say, but McKenzie probably whiffed on Allen, who is currently trying to pilot the Saints' defense back toward 21st century civilization. I don't know that any coach could have done much with the 2012 and 2013 Raiders, given how much McKenzie was doing to overturn their moribund roster. On the other hand, McKenzie was wise to move on from Sparano even after the former Dolphins coach finished the year 3-3, given how poorly interim coaches have performed after getting the permanent gig.

He then settled on a fine head-coaching candidate in Del Rio, whose nine-year tenure with the Jaguars remains curiously underrated. Del Rio took over a 6-10 team from Tom Coughlin and, after a 5-11 start, went 40-24 over the next four seasons. His Jags teams hovered four games under .500 over the next three seasons but things didn't really go south until 2011, when Del Rio was fired by new owner Shahid Khan after a 3-8 start.

The problem there wasn't Del Rio; it was Blaine Gabbert and the dismal roster compiled by general manager Gene Smith. Despite playing in one of football's worst divisions, the Jags would go 9-39 over the next three seasons before finally beginning to turn things around this year.

After rebuilding his reputation during an excellent run as Denver's defensive coordinator, Del Rio has been an inspired choice for the Raiders. He has exhibited a history of bringing in underperforming and/or unknown players and turning them into solid contributors, a feat he pulled off with Terrance Knighton in Denver. Already this season in Oakland, he has managed to turn around cornerback David Amerson, who has been competent in a meaningful role despite being cut by Washington in September. And homegrown young talents like Mack and Mario Edwards have developed quickly under Del Rio and defensive coordinator Ken Norton.

7. Just win, baby.

For all the planning McKenzie has done and the many positive steps his franchise has taken this season, a 6-7 season is hardly going to satisfy Raiders fans. A return to the playoffs would be the only way to propel this organization out of the doldrums it has sat in for a generation. And that's all but out of the question in 2015.

In 2016, though? Why can't the Raiders compete? Their young core of stars should all continue to improve, particularly Cooper, who won't be among the league leaders in drops on a yearly basis. McKenzie will have a full complement of draft picks and more money to spend in free agency than anybody else in football.

Even better, unlike years past, he won't be desperately trying to hawk his wares to past-their-prime veterans and be forced to overpay to even get into negotiations. Players are going to want to come and play with Carr, Cooper, and Mack. The Raiders could very easily come out of free agency with a massive haul; imagine what this team could look like if they brought in Russell Okung, Sean Smith, Bruce Irvin, and Kelechi Osemele this offseason. McKenzie could do that without batting an eye or remotely jeopardizing his team's long-term cap situation this offseason.

And realistically, the AFC West could very well be wide-open next year. The Chargers are the fourth-worst team in football and have holes throughout their roster after years of questionable drafts. They seem out of it. It's still entirely unclear who will play quarterback for the Broncos in 2016, and regardless of whether it's Peyton Manning, Brock Osweiler or somebody who isn't on the roster, he's unlikely to be as good as Manning was during the 2012 through 2014 seasons. And while the surging Chiefs look like one of the best teams in football, four of their top eight defenders (by snap count) in their third-ranked defense are about to hit unrestricted free agency, including stalwart linebackers Derrick Johnson and Tamba Hali. They'll also get to play a third-place schedule, which could match them up against the Jaguars and Bills while the Broncos have to play, say, the Colts and Patriots.

The two very good teams in the AFC West probably will be worse than they were a year ago. There's every reason to think the Raiders will be better. There are no guarantees in football, but after years of wandering in the wilderness, Raiders fans can finally see a plan coming to fruition. And after defending himself from public gibes and seemingly being on the verge of dismissal for the past two years, so can McKenzie.


I am very happy that you like to use Oakland as an example.

That is the example we are following and in Mackensie's first year there were people whining and complaining about Oakland's front office just like people are about this front office. Oakland was smart enough to stay the course and let things play out though. I can just imagine the torches and pitchforks when they traded Carson Palmer for a 6th round choice.

Disagree. The Raiders drafted a pass rusher and a good qb. They then used free agency to bolster their team. They have signed studs on the OL. They got Irvin. They got Crabtree. They got Smith. They got weapons for Carr in the draft in the likes of Cooper.

I don't see the Browns doing those things. The Browns have said they are going to build through the draft and not use free agency. That is not the Raider way. Sorry.

Oh, and the Raiders were smart enough to get a qb. We traded down and took Coleman. LOL

You don't see that because they drafted both in the 3rd year of the rebuild. Things like that can happen when you give a FO more than 5 minutes to rebuild a team.

Yep. Once we find our QB, I think we're going to make some major signings. Hopefully it's within the next two years. I don't think many of us can wait much longer.

I don't think that we'll find him in this draft either. Maybe we'll get lucky and find a gem in the later rounds, but I just don't see a QB that stands out.

I am not calling for the FO to be fired. I have been defending the coaching staff because the talk has been about how bad they are rather than the FO and ownership.

I do think that the FO needs to make some adjustments, which I have laid out for all to see.

The only adjustment that the FO needs is to be left alone to do their jobs for a few years.

Only in Cleveland do we start calling for heads 4 weeks into the rebuild.

I just said that I wasn't calling for their heads. You just make crap up.

My problem w/guys like you is that you act like the FO is guaranteed to succeed and refuse to evaluate each move individually. What proof do you have that they are going to succeed?

I can not guarantee the FO is going to succeed.. but I have to give them a chance.. we have blown up every front office since Haslaam took over. Will not argue with Farmer needing to go.. there have been reasons to get rid of each.. but need to give someone a chance.. time to hang in there for a bit... I will admit a baseball GM for football doesn't make sense, but now that they are here.. we are stuck.. another group means another 3 - 5 year setback. We need to get a plan and stay with it.. and see how it goes.

See, here is the problem. I have NEVER said that we should fire the FO. I simply judge each move based on it's own merits. For that, I get crucified by guys like Barney Fife.

Sorry to hear about your recent crucifixion, but I'd rather see if this works before we start changing it. Are we calling for changes again next year and the year after that as well? What kind of front office experience do you have that makes you so sure that it isn't working before the first year of a rebuild is even over?

If we were looking for shot putters your qualifications might come in handy. I went to the Browns website to see if they were hiring and saw no openings for "king of the message board" but perhaps something will open up for you in the offseason.

I don't want anyone fired, but again, can you provide some proof as to why you--and the other homers--know that this plan will work?

I mean, why can't we evaluate each move as it happens instead of just remaining mute because guys like you just know it's going to work out?

Please provide links. Thanks.

Vince Lombardi couldn't tell you if it would work or not at this point because you haven't given anyone enough time to know.

We aren't even through the first year yet.

YOU, asking others for links? Priceless.

When you come up with the link that proves that Haslam volunteered to play a game in London, let me know. I mean, you did say that. And then link to the source that Haslam wanted it counted as a home game for the Browns.

Until then, perhaps you shouldn't ask for links from others.

I'm tired of you going around acting the bully.

I just want to know how you KNOW it will work? Give me some proof, please?

So you want a link that matches the words that you put in my mouth huh?

I never said that I KNOW it will work. I don't KNOW that my car will start in the morning either, but I'm not swapping out parts tonight with the assumption that won't either.

You know what? A couple of weeks ago you accused me of making this board untolerable and how I ruin it.

You have no comprehension of what you do to this board. you come across as a bully.

Well, I have never said that I want anyone fired. Neither has mac. Yet, you and your other bully friends continue to pick on anyone who dares questions the moves the FO makes.

You guys are such hyporcrites. It's okay for you to put words into people's mouths, but then get offended if others do the same.

The difference is that YOU guys do it all the time.

Yeah arch. Right.

I said only in Cleveland do we start calling for heads in week 4 of a rebuild. If you felt you were one of those people it's on you and not me.

You try so hard to bully everyone else and then play that victim card that I don't think anyone is buying it anymore.