MVN: Most Valuable Network

#1

Posted by FireMike, March 15, 2008 12:04 AM

Please watch Ghoulston in the LSU vs Ohio game. He was blocked by RB,TE, OT you name it. The only time he was effective was when he bull rushed butt was handled by the scheme or play called. Look at all the yard they picked up on his side and how lost he looked 99% of the time. DMac dons't need a second gear he runs and cuts at full speed all the time.

Reply

#2

Posted by eze4044, March 15, 2008 12:30 AM

I think the raiders need to take mcfadden, they have gone out and spent there money on players who fill their needs. I still believe we need a legitimate deep threat to go with russel's big arm, that could be addressed in the later rounds. Mcfadden seems like the perfect fit because with him and fargas running the ball it gives the defense more time to rest. I say get dmac release LJ and trade either rhodes or bush for draft picks. i would hate to see dmac somewhere else running all over us.

Reply

#3

Posted by curiousgIII, March 15, 2008 12:47 AM

Ryan-

I didn't say that trading Bush was a done deal.

Just so you understand, we're not the GM/HC owner or president.

We're all just entertaining ourselves, you're not taking this seriously are you?

You can't tell me that if Bush and dmac both look dominate in preseason that the Raiders wouldn't entertain multiple draft pick offers for Bush? If Oakland only has a 4th invested in him.

All I am suggesting Ryan is that it gives the Raiders flexability/options to do whatever they want....

You don't know if the Raiders wouldn't trade Bush just like I don't know if the Raiders would.

Reply

#4

Posted by Darren McFadden, Hype or Real Deal? - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board - Where the Raider Natio, March 15, 2008 1:22 AM

[...] McFadden, Hype or Real Deal? Thoughts from the Dark Side | MVN - Most Valuable Network ª Blog Archive ª Darren McFadden and the O... __________________ "While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a [...]

Reply

#5

Posted by OakFoSho, March 15, 2008 2:30 AM

I disagree completely Patrick,

I will preface my McFadden goodness with my feelings on why he will be taken.....

First, what were the needs the the Raiders had going into the off-season, if you concede the losses of Clemons, Sapp, and the addition of losing Porter? In order of importance, DT, DE, OT, WR, SS, OLB.

Of these needs, which were likely to be met in the 1st rnd at #4? Possibly DT, DE, or OT, but not the others, cause no talent in those possitions, WR, SS, OLB, would be worth the 4th pick. (some say Gholston at OLB, but that's in a 3-4, and no one really wants an OLB at #4 anyway)

Continuing forward in time, Al has gone out, as you know, and attempted to fill all of these needs, including DT, DE (Carter?), and WR. I don't think Al would have brought these players in if he did not mean for them to fill the needs at their positions. Thus in Al's mind, the 1st rnd needs have been met.

Thus, Hello McFadden, Welcome to the Silver and Black!!

Now for what I think of McFadden. He can fill several positions as a multi use threat. RB, Slot WR, 3rd or 4th emergency QB, Kick/Punt Returner (Carr is decent, but face it, he ain't never gonna score, even with his high average).

Many believe that the Raiders are full at RB, but thats OK due to McFadden's versatility, not to mention the fact that Jordan, and maybe even Rhodes should/would be traded released as a result of the pick. The smart thing to do would be to trade them before the pick, that way there value is kept as high as possible, before the Raiders HAVE to unload at least one of them after the pick.

I Really Like This Pick!! D Mac all the way!!

OakFoSho

Reply

#6

Posted by Jack McLeod, March 15, 2008 3:14 AM

It doesn't matter if he's bad, good or a pro bowler. We don't need him. Justin Fargas knows now how to get yards, Dominic Rhodes is experienced, I think Michael could be the one who scores touchdowns on a regular bases and Lane Kiffen can make any back good. We need great players at positions we need, such as Chris Long if avalible, Glenn Dorsey, Jake Long or even I think Vernon Gholston. We have a good defense, just had an off year.

Reply

#7

Posted by JAMOCA JOE, March 15, 2008 4:19 AM

The Raiders will pick Chris Long, Ghoulston, or the DT from USC....if all 3 are gone by the 4th pick they will deal it.

Darren McFadden will never be an Oakland Raider in 2008!

MARK MY WORDS

Reply

#8

Posted by Oakland Raidas, March 15, 2008 5:09 AM

Are you joking me the raiders got Joseph DT, Javon Walker and Drew Carter WR, Kwame Harris OT, Gabril Wilson SS for superbowl last year, Thomas Howard OLB

Reply

#9

Posted by Tokyo Fro, March 15, 2008 5:54 AM

I have the first pick for my Keeper league.....that means running back

McFadden....a Raider...ouch that means running back by committee

I'm calling Al right now

Jerry Jones.....please just pull the trigger he's your kind of guy

on another note.....I love this shit....at least I'm not alone, on the web drooling over my Silver and Black....and its early March!

Reply

#10

Posted by curiousgIII, March 15, 2008 6:30 AM

Don't think Al will pass up Dmac.

Yeah the Raiders' backfield is crowded but like oakfo sho said Rhodes could be released or traded his renogiated contract allows the raiders more flexability to do so. LJ is gone. Fargas is injury proned and is not a long term solution.

Bush is the wild card, if he is impressive in camp and pre season and the dmc is the real deal then the Raiders can trade Bush for more than what they have invested in him!

Possibilities could be running with Rhodes fargas and dmac or Bush, dmac and fargas.

I think investing in the lines is the smarter play but Gallery was supposed to be the "smart safe" bet a couple of years ago and that didn't turn out so well. It is all a gamble.

It's tough to use Al's past drafts as a lithmus because his MO was to go with veteran QBs (plunkett, schrader, evans, hostetler, george, gannon, collins) but last year they took Jruss so who knows.....just don't see them passing on dmac unless someone trades for the pick which is a long shot.

Reply

#11

Posted by Rolni, March 15, 2008 6:37 AM

I think we don't need him!!

He will be a good RB in the NFL, not like Adrian Peterson but good...

But we need help in multiple positions so we can't afford to pick him...I think Fargas Rhodes and Bush will run for 1500-1700 yards this year together if we get RUNDMC that means we will cut\trade Rhodes (I think Jordan will be released\traded any way) and we have Fargas McFadden and Bush...i don't see them running much more than 1700 yards so why should we get him???And he would get far more money than Rhodes right?

We need that money on Aso's long term deal!!!

Let's get C.Long or Vernon Gholston!!

Reply

#12

Posted by Rolni, March 15, 2008 6:48 AM

And 1 more thing...everybody talks about Al, that he loves freaks...thats right but he selected running back in the first round only 3 times in more than 40 years (and Marcus Allen was the only one who deserved it)...Al is not very high on RBs...our freak should be Gholston:42 inch vertical jump, 4.58 40 yard dash, 37 reps at bench press...we can't pass on him

Reply

#13

Posted by raidermerv, March 15, 2008 7:49 AM

Gholston is the pick that makes the most sense right now with the signing of yet another DT. Though the run defense was weak last year it was the lack of real pressure that allowed teams to come back and win on us too. The addition of Wilson and Gholston will make the defense unpredictable as Wilson/Huff can play both safety positions and Gholston can play LB and DE. McFadden is a physical specimen but Gholston is the freak of this years draft. He ran 4.57 at his pro day workout and bested Chris Long in bench press reps. His college stats are outstanding but he's not Howie's son so he's has been a dark horse up til now. Al doesn't pick too many RBs but has said "I'd rather be right than consistent" so it's hard to tell. I think he'll go Defense because I think he has to prove himself after keeping Ryan aboard especially with all the stink it has caused along with the Kiffin situation.

Reply

#14

Posted by Anthony, March 15, 2008 8:01 AM

Anyone ever think that Al may just be playing this one exactly the right way?

What better way to keep the interest in your pick as high as it can possibly be than to do the obvious thing and try like hell to get all of your needs 'filled' via FA?

My hunch is that Al is banking on a trade -- whether with Dallas for a load of picks (and perhaps MBIII) or with, say, the Jets for an extra pick or two.

This is a pretty good gamble he has going, I think -- he's made McFadden the "obvious" pick for the Raiders at 4, thus driving up the legitimate asking price of the slot. If no one bites, then he still has the option of taking DMac -- or anyone else he so chooses.

The only thing that Al really loses in this is potential trade leverage re: Rhodes and Jordan; as I see it, either broad possibility winds up in a reduction of their trade value, to the point that one or both will probably be released. Small price to pay for doing a pretty solid, if a bit telegraphed, job of posturing.

Last win out of this: the Raiders may have scored themselves a couple of players during their spending spree. This may wind up being one of their more productive offseasons in quite a while -- at least since 1999.

Reply

#15

Posted by The RaiderCast » Blog Archive » Thoughts from the Dark Side: Darren McFadden and the Oak, March 15, 2008 8:38 AM

[...] Read more. Posted in Blog, Oakland Raiders | [...]

Reply

#16

Posted by Ryan, March 15, 2008 9:21 AM

First of all, curiousglll, theres no way in hell we'd trade michael bush. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER 2 YEARS AGO BEFORE BUSHS INJURY? He was the heisman favorite going into the season. He dominated the year before scoring 23tds and rushing somewhere like 1800 yards. Then against kentucky in the first game of the season, HE ONLY GOT TO PLAY ONE HALF OF FOOTBALL AND RAN 160 SOMETHIN YARDS AND 3TDS!!!

His legs do not stop on contact and also (this wasnt in the story but mayock also said it) DMC DOES NOT have a 2nd gear. Which is very critical at this level. So if we want a back WHOSE LEGS STOP ON CONTACT AND HE DOESNT HAVE A 2ND GEAR LETS GRAB DMC...

Or we can keep running Fargas, who is the toughest runner since when crockett actually ran back in 02...and we can keep bush who is a beast who looks as fast on tape as dmc...and rhodes who can do anything we ask.

I could seriously care less if we average only 3 points per game. JUST AS LONG AS THE OTHER TEAM AVERAGES ZERO...and we can finally shut that damn tomlinson down...CAN DMC PLAY DEFENSE? NOPE...

i dont care who we take, just as long as its someone on the DLINE...when that happens, MORRISON AND HOWARD WILL BE AT FREE RANGE TO OBLITERATE LT, LJ, AND WHOEVER THE DONKEYS WILL PLAY AT RB

Reply

#17

Posted by Ryan, March 15, 2008 9:34 AM

Here's some PROOF:

Here's where he dominates a game. Something dmc didnt do:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4-1vkSVf9y4

Here's where his legs dont stop on contact and you see his brute strength:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=WgoFCkqK2iE&feature=related

And here's the complete highlight package...NOTE HOW VALUABLE HE IS AS A PASS OPTION OUT OF THE BACKFIELD:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QhEFxYxTXrk&feature=related

Complete highlight pack part 2:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xhAY7F8Ly38&feature=related

JUST FOR GOOD MEASURE AT THE 1:45MIN MARK INTO THE FIRST HIGHLIGHT COMPLETE PACKAGE LISTEN TO WHEN THE ANNOUNCERS SAY BUSH WAS THE BACKUP QB...SO WHAT DOES DMC HAVE THAT BUSH DOESNT??? NOTHING

Reply

#18

Posted by Ryan, March 15, 2008 9:36 AM

Just for good measure...Michael Bush was the backup QB in college too...so what does dmc have that bush doesnt????

Reply

#19

Posted by Johnnie Queefer, March 15, 2008 9:44 AM

What about a pick and trade to the team showing the most desire to move up and draft old dead legs? Dallas?

Reply

#20

Posted by SeattleRaider, March 15, 2008 10:05 AM

Al could be hoping that Dallas jumps ahead of Oakland to take McFadden , thus having one of the top three ( Long,Long or Dorsey)fall to into his hands. If McFadden is still there at #4, Al will take the call from his friend Jones (or others)and weigh the offers against drafting Gholston.

Reply

#21

Posted by Juice, March 15, 2008 10:48 AM

McFadden is a great player, and a physical freak that will indeed make a profound impact in the NFL somewhere. People compare him to Adrian Peterson, because of his home-run threat ability but they are pretty different. Peterson is a more violent runner, and better inbetween the tackles. McFadden tends to stretch the run out a bit more and take it outside to take advantage of his speed. McFadden is more versatile though, as his plethora of skills were showcased thoroughly during his tenure at Arkansas. I believe he would absolutely thrive in the Raiders' zone blocking scheme, especially where he would share carries with Justin Fargas who is effective inbetween the tackles anyway. They would complement each other quite nicely in my mind. Yes, they have more pressing needs, especially across the defensive line, but it would be foolish to think McFadden couldn't improve the Raiders' woeful offense. Yes, they restuctured Dominique Rhodes' contract, and LaMont Jordan is still lingering around, but it would also be foolish to think that Al wouldn't use them as bargaining chips to land an extra draft pick, (say, a third rounder in which they don't currently have.). As for the arrival of Michael Bush that everyone seems to be waiting for. This kid has had MULTIPLE season ending injuries to legs, which are paramount for a running back, and he was a fourth round pick which means there is little money invested in him anyway. He's damaged goods either way, and if another team wants to aquire him because of his "potential" if he were to become the odd man out, then he would be yet another bargaining chip for Al. So let me reitorate this for everyone, we do not need Darren McFadden, but I doubt any of us will be pissed off if he becomes a member of the Silver & Black and puts together a season similar to Peterson's.

Reply

#22

Posted by Brian, March 15, 2008 11:03 AM

Can D-Mac play defense because this is where games are won. Hope for either Chris Long or Ghoulston. Fargas, Bush and Rhodes will rush for at least 1500 yards combined. Our defense needs fixed with our 1st round pick, possibly 2nd too. After that, we need depth at WR and Oline and back up QB in the remaining rounds.

DE Kalimba Edwards is available. We threw money at some questionable players already in FA, why not one more.

Reply

#23

Posted by slow mo, March 15, 2008 11:23 AM

Say what u what we to address the left side of he offensive live if we dont look at closely we are going to be in big trouble

Reply

#24

Posted by big ROCK, March 15, 2008 1:12 PM

This is Al Davis' 2nd chance in as many years to have another "Bo Jackson" type of play maker. He won't pass this time around. McFadden just put up mind boggling times of 4.27(handheld) and 4.32 (digital computer). I truly believe that this guy is going to be a stud for a long time. The re-signing of T Kelley and the acquisition of William Joseph are signs that Al is taking McFadden. Unless Chris Long is available, McFadden is the right choice. D Mac would do wonders for our return game. He and Fargas can split carries and even be in the backfield together. Remember how we used to fake it up the middle to Ty Wheatley and pitch it out to N. Kaufman for big gains. Damn, i'm getting pumped already! RAIDER NATION 4 LIFE !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply

#25

Posted by FireMike, March 15, 2008 1:58 PM

Raiders trade 2nd round pick to Atlanta for Dangelo Hall

Reply

#26

Posted by dooshbag, March 15, 2008 2:59 PM

you guys seriously just paid every other teams garbage probowl money. Al Davis has seriously gone senile. I can't wait to see your QB look like the most overpaid bust next year also.hahahahahaha

Reply

#27

Posted by Shannan, March 15, 2008 3:48 PM

I can see McFadden being another Reggie Bush - and we don't need him. We should be drafting on need and RB is not one of them.

Reply

#28

Posted by LDizzle, March 15, 2008 4:44 PM

Hey Patrick, the Raiders picked another RB in the first round by the name of Napoleon Kaufman.

Reply

#29

Posted by LDizzle, March 15, 2008 6:03 PM

Jack McLeod:

Kiffin is spelled with two I's first of all (Not Kiffen) and 2nd of all it is not Kiffin that makes those running backs good it is Tom Cable the Oline coach who institutes the Zone Blocking Scheme.

And many people have said it now I will echo it: WE HAVE BUSH SO WE DON'T NEED MDFADDEN. BUSH IS BETTER THAN MCFADDEN. THERE IS NO REASON TO TAKE MCFADDEN. There is a reason McFadden fell out of the Heisman race less than half way through the season. Bush was the odds on favorite for the Heisman his senior year until he was injured. And he would have gone top five if he would have left after his junior season. REMEMBER? So many people seem to have such short term memory. McFadden is no Bush and he is no Peterson. The only knocks on Bush and Peterson coming out of college was injury concerns. McFadden has many more knocks than that. The Raiders will take Chris Long or trade down. And with the money it will take to sign Hall it looks like a lock that we will trade down because we can't afford a top 5 pick anymore.

Reply

#30

Posted by OakFoSho, March 15, 2008 7:20 PM

LDizzle,

While I like you passion with regards to Bush, but the split backfield of McFadden-Bush, or Bush-Fargas with D Mac split out just makes to much sense. Again Bro, we all feel passionately, and I will be the first to admit if I am wrong, but I am trying to think like Al Davis. Not like myself. (I think this should also be said so people don't think I'm crazy! lol!)

Al brought all these people in for a reason, to fill needs, (whether they work out or not is questionable but Al thinks they will which is why he brought them in) and He feels the needs are now filled.

Now LDizzle, and the rest of you, I want to ask you a fundamental question about the Draft. But before I do, remember that I am trying to think like AL Davis in this conversation. So here goes.......

If all of your major needs are filled, as Al believes, doesn't it make sense to take the best player on the board?

And if this is true, as Al Believes, is that player not McFadden at #4?

OakFoSho

Reply

#31

Posted by Raider Till Death!, March 15, 2008 8:52 PM

darren Mcfadden is a beast without doubt but i dont think he will drafted considering the sucess of Fargas and the resigning of Rhodes. This soldifies Al's position on the running game for a while. The Raider draft may either be Gholston, Chris Long or Jake Long. Gholston and Chris are all star Defensive players and will be a threatening force on the Oakland defense while Jake Long will considerably help the O-line.

Reply

#32

Posted by Josue D., March 15, 2008 9:50 PM

Oakland's needs have almost been filled by Free Agency, And In my opinion, i think the #4 pick should be McFadden, because he is not just another Running back, he is a QB, WR, & RB. They should Trade Jordan & Rhodes for good draft picks & keep attacking FA.

Reply

#33

Posted by OakFoSho, March 15, 2008 9:53 PM

Josue D.

Don't forget McFadden would be a kick and punt returner as well. Thats a ton of needs filled by one player.

OakFoSho

Reply

#34

Posted by Darren McFadden and the Oakland Raiders, Hype or Real Deal? - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board, March 16, 2008 12:44 AM

[...] is a top flight back and according to almost everyone a top pick for the draft this year......... Thoughts from the Dark Side | MVN - Most Valuable Network ª Blog Archive ª Darren McFadden and the O... __________________ Jesus was a good guy.... he didn't need this **** John Prine Send my mail [...]

Reply

#35

Posted by Chicago Raider, March 16, 2008 7:45 AM

Interesting thoughts Anthony...Is Al playing some chess to make that #4 pick even more valuable?

Dallas really wants Run DMC so I guess time will tell.

What do you think the Raiders could get back if they were to trade down?

Reply

#36

Posted by Mad Road Dog, March 16, 2008 11:09 AM

If the trade for DeAngelo Hall is consumated then the Raiders have no 2nd round pick. That means if AD cannot trade down to get C. Williams for a LT, we would be nuts to pass on J. Long if he is still there at our 4th over all pick.

Reply

#37

Posted by LDizzle, March 16, 2008 2:49 PM

OakFoSho I don't think Al Davis thinks all theneeds are filled. I think he is not addressing certain positions (ie DE, a GOOD starting DT, and a GOOD starting OT) because he has the intention of drafting them. I still think you are wrong even when you claim to be trying to think like AD.

Let us also remember that, along with Dallas and NYJ, the Lions just let Kevin Jones go so they are throwing their hat into the ring for the RunDMc sweepstakes. There could be a lot of bidders for that #4 pick so if there is any ultimate plan AD has for that pick then that is it.

Reply

#38

Posted by OakFoSho, March 16, 2008 6:40 PM

LDizzle,

If Al does not believe that DT is secure, then why invest so much in Kelly. He certainly expects Kelly to start at DT (specifically the 3) with all that scratch Al gave him, and if Sands is not the starter at NT then he would have been cut, or restructured (could still happen, but won't). Add onto that a very productive and highly paid Warren as Kelly's backup, and Joseph as Sands backup. I mean really, how could Al possibly add even more salary at DT when there is already so much tied up in the position.

The addition of Carter at DE fills a need, and allows a platoon at RE. So again, why add more here, except for a late round filler, to mostly play special teams, and develop for later, possibly after Burgess leaves in 2 years.

The most important name when concidering the O-Line is the MVP Cable. Look how much improved they were at the end of last season. They picked up Kwame, which I really like, cause if Cable likes him, then he will be good. I trust Cable, and the line will be even better this season. Again, ZB linemen, are much less valued, and GREAT ZB linemen can and must be found in the later rounds. The one knock on Long is his lack of elite speed, and that is the one area that you do not want to sacrifice in the ZB scheme. On top of all this, the major reason Al will not take an OT at #4, ROBERT GALLERY!!!

Al will take what he covets most, and just because he has only taken 3 RBs in the first round in the teams history, McFadden will be the choice. Whether he is delt or not, well I can not say, and won't presume to know, because we have no clue who would REALLY be interested this far from the draft. Regardless, it will be McFadden.

If I am wrong, I will admit it when the time comes.

OakFoSho

Reply

#39

Posted by Christophe', March 16, 2008 7:26 PM

Bush is better than McFadden. Why waste a top pick on your third back?

Reply

#40

Posted by LDizzle, March 16, 2008 7:31 PM

OakFoSho did you sign some kind of contract that states that you must mention McFadden in every comment?

I do agree (and have said recently) that getting a zone blocking Olineman will be in the lower rounds and there is no way AD would take an Olineman with the #4 pick because of the Gallery debacle. So I agree with you on that.

I would also consider the possibility that Sands may not make it out of camp. He has to start living up to his big contract or he will be cut unless he is willing to take a paycut and/or be demoted. I still think that Carter would be a bad idea. But even if the Raiders signed him, he would only be the starter if they couldn't get a stud DE in the draft (ie C Long, Gholston, Ellis etc). So Carter would be an insurance policy and would mean nothing in regards to our need at DE.

"if Cable likes him, then he will be good".

That is not how it works OakFo. This is what I mean by you being a "true believer" or more commonly refered to as a "Homer". Plenty of guys are considered great judges of talent and make mistakes. Cable also brought in that dud Cornell Green last year. Gallery for instance was hailed across the country in every magazine by every expert as a "can't miss" prospect at OT and whoops! For the record I was PISSED when they chose him. Not that I am some great predictor but I just didn't like the pick at #2.

I will say that there is always a chance that AD could pull an Eli Manning/Chargers thing and draft him with the inention of sending him to another team for their pick and another pick. That could be a smart move. I just hope for his sake if he does it that it doesn't come back to bite us.

Reply

#41

Posted by OakFoSho, March 16, 2008 7:43 PM

LDizzle

Cornell Green a dud? Ha! He was brought in as an experienced OT in the ZB scheme. While he did have a foot injury, and McQuistan did start the last 6 games as a result, he was plenty good in the first 10 games, and he was just resigned as a result. A Dud? I think not, as if that were the case he would not have been starting, and doing a good job at RT when healthy, as the possition was greatly improved. And I say this as a Langston Walker fan, because like Kirk Morrison, he went to my HS.

Again, cable is the one person I have the most faith in, as he worked miracles last season, and the Raiders will be even better with a year under their belt in the ZB system.

Carter would not be a bad idea, especially because he will be able to platoon and this stay fresh as an older player.

OakFoSho

Reply

#42

Posted by Anthony, March 16, 2008 11:38 PM

Chicago Raider --

It's hard to guess what the Raiders could do with the extra selections they'd get via trade, but let's assume that Dallas' 2 1s and 2 are in the mix (we can further assume fun little things like it's the 1s, the 2 and Barber III for 1.4 and Rhodes, but that verges on the silly). At the risk of sounding like some of the other one-noters on the blog at the moment, 1.22 could be Branden Albert, one pick before Pittsburgh would be delighted to pick him up. He's listed as G, but was excellent filling in at OLT when needed last season, and is an incredible talent waiting to be harnessed -- smart, fast, strong, quick and agile -- he's a solid OLT prospect waiting for the right line coach to turn him into a tackle.

At 28, there will be a fair share of interior DL and ends available, perhaps not elite, but good enough to come in and make an impact -- Kentwan Balmer (DT, UNC) or Phillip Merling (DE, Clemson) could both still be there at this spot. If the Raiders are looking later rounds for the six-by-six guys (you know, six feet tall, six feet across), then they could go WR here (some of the top-shelf WRs will still be on the board by 28, including perhaps Hardy or Doucet or both), or could look for a rush SLB -- or, if they are so inclined, look elsewhere on the OL, which wouldn't be the worst idea, either.

But this is all spitballing until the first three names are called and McFadden isn't one of them.

Reply

#43

Posted by Tony from Canada, March 17, 2008 5:41 AM

Fargas is an aberration. Last year was a "one-and-done". I can't see him putting up those numbers ever again. Therefore, with all the FA moves made by Davis this year. D Mac should be the pick at #4. Jordan/Rhodes are gone for a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Fargas becomes insurance for Bush…who truly remains a "McGahee type" wildcard back. D Mac is so versatile that he becomes a "Deion Sanders type" player…rb, return man, 3rd/4th string QB…just think about the trick plays Kiffin would implement with D Mac lining up behind JR.

Reply

#44

Posted by r8rshawn, March 17, 2008 8:46 AM

Dmac+Bush reminds me of Bush+White(USC)..

hmm interestingly enough our coach was apart of the system that created Bush+White.. therefore, i'm all for drafting Dmac. unless there's a real highly rated "run stuffing" NT in this draft.

Reply

#45

Posted by WOODSLEE, March 22, 2008 10:24 PM

How many times did we see it last season? Get to the red zone and no points. Our defence tired, and the offences inabilty to get a first down to give them a rest. Mcfadden is the real deal and will be an impact immediately and will get us those first downs that we did not get last season.

P.S....He is a good blocker, which will help Fargas. Good bye....Rhodes and Jordan.....they should be good for a couple of forth rounders. Let's go Al ! Let's not blow this 3rd and 1.....Thanks for letting me Rant!

Reply

#46

Posted by darren mcfadden rivals highlights, June 4, 2008 5:08 AM

[...] the Oakland Raiders, Hype or Real Deal? ... darren mcfadden will never be an Oakland Raider in 2008!http://mvn.com/nfl-raiders/2008/03/15/darren-mcfadden-and-the-oakland-raiders-hype-or-real-deal/2008 Draft - Darren McFadden NFL Football at CBSSports.comDarren McFadden, a two-time Heisman [...]

Reply