Raiders Re-up Fargas

[Geo]

Originally Posted by nobodyinparticular

If we're talking about a #3 RB, I think Rhodes very well could be gone. Adimchinobe Echemandu could do just fine in the role that Rhodes would have and for much less as well. (and with less of an ego) Rhodes had a serious problem with his lack of playing time in 2007, which could be understandable, but on the other hand the Raiders were going with the hot hand which was definitely not Rhodes.

I forgot they already signed Echemandu, that's right.

When the Raiders did finally give Rhodes the ball, he was productive. In the last three weeks of the season, against the Colts, Jags, and Chargers, he had 63 carries for 278 yards (4.4 avg) and caught 10 passes for 60 yards.

But as you said, it was a case of the hot hand in Oakland. LaMont Jordan started off the year very hot and then Fargas stepped in very well. When Fargas went down to injury, the ball then went to Rhodes. Lane Kiffin knows he can produce a successful running game with a good (but not probably great) back.

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by Young Legend

it would be stupid to draft McFadden now..your gonna spend a pick on a rb to go along with your other 3 RB's..and just ignore the real problem in oakland witch is DT.

Hahaha....


Anyway, they could still draft McFadden. That's reasonable money for a backup in the NFL. It lowers the chances no doubt, but it's not an absolute either way by any means.

[bigbluedefense]

doesn't Kiffin run a ZBS system similar to Denver where anybody can go back there and run the rock?

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

doesn't Kiffin run a ZBS system similar to Denver where anybody can go back there and run the rock?

That system is about as real as the lockness monster.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

That system is about as real as the lockness monster.

i think theres some merit to it. i personally don't like it because while it does allow for a good running game despite lack luster talent, you still have issues in pass protection, probably even larger issues in pass protection bc you have average to below average talent in there coupled with lightweight bodies that can get moved backwards.

of course no system works without the players, but the design of it does have some merits. *shrug*

[NIN1984]

Under Art Shell with power blocking Raiders were pretty close to last in rushing and allowed 72 sacks, under Kiffin's ZBS Raiders were I believe 4th in rushing and allowed 42 sacks...

Allowing 42 sacks isn't anything to brag about but with pretty much the same players who allowed 72 sacks, it was a big improvement. So I hope we stick with the zone-blocking scheme.

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by NIN1984

Under Art Shell with power blocking Raiders were pretty close to last in rushing and allowed 72 sacks, under Kiffin's ZBS Raiders were I believe 4th in rushing and allowed 42 sacks...

Allowing 42 sacks isn't anything to brag about but with pretty much the same players who allowed 72 sacks, it was a big improvement. So I hope we stick with the zone-blocking scheme.

The previous system was run by a manager of a bed and breakfast. Bad comparison.

[NIN1984]

That's true, but with the talent the Raiders have on the O-line the zone-blocking scheme best fits them. So hopefully Tom Cable returns and we can continue to improve.

[TitleTown088]

Fargas is such a goofball. Nothing agianst the guy, he's got skills but just a goofy looking bastard.