Comments on: Oakland Raiders' 2009 Projection: 6-10 http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html A daily mix of sports, poker, casino, pop culture, music, hot celebrities, babes and gambling news - all presented in hilarious Bodog style! Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:55:35 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: oaktown11 http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50503 oaktown11 Tue, 18 Aug 2009 04:06:26 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50503 the raiders are goin to suck again until we get acoach that will dicipline that team we need marty shottenheimer he will take us back to the super bowl they will go back makin stupid penalties. we needed to get rid of russell to the nfc for some olinemen but of coarse we didnt. we had some good qbacks but how can they throw when they are always on there backs. the raiders are goin to suck again until we get acoach that will dicipline that team we need marty shottenheimer he will take us back to the super bowl they will go back makin stupid penalties. we needed to get rid of russell to the nfc for some olinemen but of coarse we didnt. we had some good qbacks but how can they throw when they are always on there backs.

]]> By: Robert http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50497 Robert Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:25:05 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50497 What a ridiculous writeup can't you idiots stop rehashing stuff that everybody knows can change from one season to the next? For one this team hasn't been fundementally coached like it is now since Gruden left Second your Dallas prediction doesn't even take into consideration thatDallas was just taken to the clinic last Thursday by these same Raiders. The past is the past. What difference does it make whether your team wins @ - What a ridiculous writeup can't you idiots stop rehashing stuff that everybody knows can change from one season to the next? For one this team hasn't been fundementally coached like it is now since Gruden left Second your Dallas prediction doesn't even take into consideration thatDallas was just taken to the clinic last Thursday by these same Raiders. The past is the past. What difference does it make whether your team wins @ -

]]> By: Peter Morace http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50490 Peter Morace Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:40:35 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50490 How can you say JaMarcus Russell isn't cutting it? He threw more touchdown passes than interceptions last year, and had a passer rating over 90 in the last three games. You said the third year is make-or-break, but his first year was a wash due to his extended workout. You make it clear you're not sold on Heyward-Bey, but you fail to mention the names Louis Murphy and Chaz Schillens. And it's funny how you give them no chance beating Houston, even though Oakland beat Houston last year. I guess, for the haters, it's easier to regurgitate the spew of ESPN than actually do some research. How can you say JaMarcus Russell isn't cutting it? He threw more touchdown passes than interceptions last year, and had a passer rating over 90 in the last three games. You said the third year is make-or-break, but his first year was a wash due to his extended workout. You make it clear you're not sold on Heyward-Bey, but you fail to mention the names Louis Murphy and Chaz Schillens. And it's funny how you give them no chance beating Houston, even though Oakland beat Houston last year. I guess, for the haters, it's easier to regurgitate the spew of ESPN than actually do some research.

]]> By: TA http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50489 TA Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:50:59 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50489 You are a dimwit mostly. Obviously, you have not paid too close of attention to what is going on in Oakland. Some of your statements are in line with reality, most of it way off to the left. Concerning the draft, I am a believer that you must let the guys play. Was I concerned with the Raiders draft? Yes, but I also recall many experts clamoring for the Raiders to draft Dorsey over McFadden last year. McFadden is poised for a breakout season while Dorsey is having some issues. Plus, I start to get the feeling that DHB need not make an immediate impact right away... Chaz Schilens has had an excellent camp and will be our number 1 receiver. The other receivers have been coming along well also. If Javon can contribute anything, we should have a decent core of receivers. With Chaz Schilens we didnt need to select Crabtree. I understand that now. Plus, where is Crabtree now? At home. Exactly. Concerning Jamarcus Russell, he IS improving. And while this is his third season, it is actuallly only his second starting at QB. While he needs to make major strides, this is not a make or break season. No one has claimed that it is except for you dimwit ass journalists. As mentioned earlier, the receiving corps will be much improved. Chaz is looking like a #1, Johnnie Lee Higgins is ready to build off of last season, DHB is still working, Louis Murphy is looking ready to contribute, Javon is reportedly healthy, and there are others under the radar having fairly good camps. My guess is that Nick Miller will make the squad as an undrafted free agent. Your most legitimate claim is regarding the run defense. I still think the group is suspect and I agree that I hope John Marshall can get these guys to defend the run well. For the record, we beat the Texans last year. I don't have a problem with you claiming that the Raiders will go 6-10 (although I believe they will be 1-2 games better). But the point is, you need to support your claims with reality. Dimwit. You are a dimwit mostly. Obviously, you have not paid too close of attention to what is going on in Oakland. Some of your statements are in line with reality, most of it way off to the left.

Concerning the draft, I am a believer that you must let the guys play. Was I concerned with the Raiders draft? Yes, but I also recall many experts clamoring for the Raiders to draft Dorsey over McFadden last year. McFadden is poised for a breakout season while Dorsey is having some issues. Plus, I start to get the feeling that DHB need not make an immediate impact right away… Chaz Schilens has had an excellent camp and will be our number 1 receiver. The other receivers have been coming along well also. If Javon can contribute anything, we should have a decent core of receivers. With Chaz Schilens we didnt need to select Crabtree. I understand that now. Plus, where is Crabtree now? At home. Exactly.

Concerning Jamarcus Russell, he IS improving. And while this is his third season, it is actuallly only his second starting at QB. While he needs to make major strides, this is not a make or break season. No one has claimed that it is except for you dimwit ass journalists. As mentioned earlier, the receiving corps will be much improved. Chaz is looking like a #1, Johnnie Lee Higgins is ready to build off of last season, DHB is still working, Louis Murphy is looking ready to contribute, Javon is reportedly healthy, and there are others under the radar having fairly good camps. My guess is that Nick Miller will make the squad as an undrafted free agent.

Your most legitimate claim is regarding the run defense. I still think the group is suspect and I agree that I hope John Marshall can get these guys to defend the run well.

For the record, we beat the Texans last year.

I don't have a problem with you claiming that the Raiders will go 6-10 (although I believe they will be 1-2 games better). But the point is, you need to support your claims with reality.

Dimwit.

]]> By: RUKIDDING's echo http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50487 RUKIDDING's echo Sun, 16 Aug 2009 21:31:54 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50487 Ditto Ditto

]]> By: RUKIDDING http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50485 RUKIDDING Sun, 16 Aug 2009 19:45:11 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50485 Comment *Dude, Are you schizophrenic? This is you earlier this month: “… Look for the Chiefs to get their first win in Week 2 against Oakland. It was in Oakland last Nov. 30 that Kansas City last won. It's the second straight year K.C.’s home opener is against the Raiders, who won 23-8 last year at Arrowhead.” Crisp, clean, fact-filled analysis. And then there’s you here: “….The Week 2 matchup is definitely winnable, as the Chiefs are coming off a 2-14 season and the fact that Oakland has won two in a row at Arrowhead. Beating Denver also is very possible, as the Broncos are being overhauled and may not have star receiver Brandon Marshall for the game as he still might face a suspension for an off-field issue still pending in Atlanta (as of this writing). Could Oakland be 2-1 after three games? No question it’s possible, perhaps even likely.” Let me get this straight. The Chiefs could beat the Raiders in Week 2, or (behind door number two) the Raiders could beat the Chiefs? I bet you’re right. Then again could I double my money if I bet you’re wrong too? You’re intellect is truly dizzying little BoDog, truly dizzying. Comment *Dude,

Are you schizophrenic?
This is you earlier this month:

“… Look for the Chiefs to get their first win in Week 2 against Oakland. It was in Oakland last Nov. 30 that Kansas City last won. It's the second straight year K.C.’s home opener is against the Raiders, who won 23-8 last year at Arrowhead.”

Crisp, clean, fact-filled analysis.
And then there’s you here:

“….The Week 2 matchup is definitely winnable, as the Chiefs are coming off a 2-14 season and the fact that Oakland has won two in a row at Arrowhead. Beating Denver also is very possible, as the Broncos are being overhauled and may not have star receiver Brandon Marshall for the game as he still might face a suspension for an off-field issue still pending in Atlanta (as of this writing). Could Oakland be 2-1 after three games? No question it’s possible, perhaps even likely.”

Let me get this straight. The Chiefs could beat the Raiders in Week 2, or (behind door number two) the Raiders could beat the Chiefs?
I bet you’re right.
Then again could I double my money if I bet you’re wrong too?
You’re intellect is truly dizzying little BoDog, truly dizzying.

]]> By: RUKIDDING http://beat.bodoglife.com/sports/oakland-raiders-2009-projection-6-10-32053.html/comment-page-1/#comment-50483 RUKIDDING Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:49:33 +0000 http://beat.bodoglife.com/?p=27202#comment-50483 I sure hope you don't get paid to write this stuff little fella because it sure does seem like you rely way too much on the past to fairly predict the future. Let's take a look at your "facts" little fella. It is true that Al Davis is still the owner of the Raiders. That's a "fact." And the Raiders were "in fact" (your words) ripped for selecting Heyward-Bey and Mike Mitchell. It's also a "fact" that Michael Crabtree was "more heralded." So what? What isn't a "fact" is that the Raiders made the wrong choice in either the first or the second round and given the "fact" that Crabtree hasn't yet touched the field their choice of receivers is looking better every day. Thanks for the tip of the cap on the Raider running game little fella, that means a lot coming from you. But to suggest Russell isn't improving as a quarterback flat out ignores reality. He was improving at the end of last season and continues to progress. Look for that to continue this season as he gets more comfortable with a stable of talented young receivers and the return of a healthy Javon Walker, whose season-ending injury last year came just as he and Russell were starting to connect (see the New York Jets game). With all due respect the Raiders 11-game losing streak to the Chargers the Week 1 game is definitely winnable. San Diego has gotten off to slow starts in recent years and had to come back from a fourth quarter deficit to beat the Raiders in one of their two games last year. They could easily be 3-0 to start the season this year and while you say they have no prayer against the Texans I remember last year's victory and wonder "why the hell not?" Are the Texans vastly improved? I'm thinking no. Are the Raiders a better team? Even you are thinking yes. What gives little fella? The fact that the Raiders are currently boasting a "10-game losing streak in prime time games" doesn't mean any more than the fact that they remain the winningest NFL franchise in prime time games. The history is interesting, little fella, but it's just not relevant. That's why they play the games. And then there's this little gem: Winning at Dallas in Oakland’s first Turkey Day game since 1970? Not happening." Are you kidding me? Dallas is nothing special this year and suggesting that they have some built in advantage because the Raiders haven't played on Thanksgiving since 1970 is flat out absurd. But wait, there's more (you truly are the gift that keeps on giving little fella: "One thing is for sure: the Raiders are glad Mike Shanahan is out of the division. The former Broncos coach was 21-7 against Oakland in 14 seasons." I hate to break it to you, but as a loyal Raiders fan I'd pay to have Shanahan at the helm of this year's edition of the Broncos. It wouldn't get any better than pummeling him twice with Kyle Orton under center. That would be a real treat let me tell you. As for the Raiders having the longest active streak of 10 losses or more? Who cares. They lost two games on last second field goals and dropped fourth quarter leads (including a sizable one to the Chargers) in a couple of others. This team was competitive and will continue to be. Teams that underestimate them do so at their own peril. I sure hope you don't get paid to write this stuff little fella because it sure does seem like you rely way too much on the past to fairly predict the future.
Let's take a look at your "facts" little fella.
It is true that Al Davis is still the owner of the Raiders. That's a "fact." And the Raiders were "in fact" (your words) ripped for selecting Heyward-Bey and Mike Mitchell. It's also a "fact" that Michael Crabtree was "more heralded."
So what?
What isn't a "fact" is that the Raiders made the wrong choice in either the first or the second round and given the "fact" that Crabtree hasn't yet touched the field their choice of receivers is looking better every day.
Thanks for the tip of the cap on the Raider running game little fella, that means a lot coming from you. But to suggest Russell isn't improving as a quarterback flat out ignores reality. He was improving at the end of last season and continues to progress. Look for that to continue this season as he gets more comfortable with a stable of talented young receivers and the return of a healthy Javon Walker, whose season-ending injury last year came just as he and Russell were starting to connect (see the New York Jets game).
With all due respect the Raiders 11-game losing streak to the Chargers the Week 1 game is definitely winnable. San Diego has gotten off to slow starts in recent years and had to come back from a fourth quarter deficit to beat the Raiders in one of their two games last year.
They could easily be 3-0 to start the season this year and while you say they have no prayer against the Texans I remember last year's victory and wonder "why the hell not?"
Are the Texans vastly improved? I'm thinking no. Are the Raiders a better team? Even you are thinking yes. What gives little fella?
The fact that the Raiders are currently boasting a "10-game losing streak in prime time games" doesn't mean any more than the fact that they remain the winningest NFL franchise in prime time games. The history is interesting, little fella, but it's just not relevant. That's why they play the games.
And then there's this little gem: Winning at Dallas in Oakland’s first Turkey Day game since 1970? Not happening."
Are you kidding me?
Dallas is nothing special this year and suggesting that they have some built in advantage because the Raiders haven't played on Thanksgiving since 1970 is flat out absurd.
But wait, there's more (you truly are the gift that keeps on giving little fella:
"One thing is for sure: the Raiders are glad Mike Shanahan is out of the division. The former Broncos coach was 21-7 against Oakland in 14 seasons."
I hate to break it to you, but as a loyal Raiders fan I'd pay to have Shanahan at the helm of this year's edition of the Broncos. It wouldn't get any better than pummeling him twice with Kyle Orton under center. That would be a real treat let me tell you.
As for the Raiders having the longest active streak of 10 losses or more? Who cares. They lost two games on last second field goals and dropped fourth quarter leads (including a sizable one to the Chargers) in a couple of others. This team was competitive and will continue to be. Teams that underestimate them do so at their own peril.

]]>