February 13, 2016, 07:44:06 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 07:03:54 AM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by goalax13
Nice!
C.Woodson will represent well. Raiders will have
A voice on the program. Cool

It'll be interesting if Tom Jackson suddenly changes his tune about the Raiders now that CWood is sitting across from him.

 2 
 on: February 12, 2016, 10:18:49 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by varaider
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season.  




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Why do you say that?  because he had a good game against us?  Lmao... stop it...

His production went down nearly 60%, from when he was with us...

He had 1 INT, in week 13 vs, guess who?  

Allen had his 1st INT by his 3rd full game...

I loved Branch, not gonna say Allen is better or worse (we can't, he was injured, JUST like Branch always was for us)... But I will say THIS...

Making the notion (IF that's the case) that we somehow "lost out" because we let INJURY-PRONE Branch go... is kind of a reach... Maybe you guys caught amnesia... let me remind you...

HE MISSED 27 OUT OF HIS LAST 32 GAMES IN A RAIDER UNIFORM.

Cmon man...  you guys try any angle you can to shit on this man, even when he does what ANY other GM in the LEAGUE would have done... smdh...

Lmao... Nate Allen just this past season, played in exactly the same amount of games that Tyvon Branch did his last TWO seasons with us... So in REALITY Allen has already evened up the production we "lost" from letting Branch go, except at least Allen had an INT during his 5 games....

Your excuse?  Injury?  Well yea... Allen was injured too... go figure... Can't have the cake and eat it too fellaz... Either you blame a guy for injury, or you don't... The answer is, you don't...

When he's healthy hes a pretty solid back up. Experienced vet, never heard of any locker room problems, not a bad tackler, still has speed to cover some ground. And most importantly the chiefs defense didn't drop off while he was playing

Neither me nor nutmeg even mentioned Allen in either of our posts, and you quote us and go on some rant comparing branch and Allen.








Just because I use more words than you're used to, doesn't make it a "rant"... lol...

And don't insult my intelligence, the post is about Allen, so to bring up Branch can only be in comparison in some way, shape or form... no matter how you (or him) try to spin it AFTER the fact...

I notice you didn't mention anything about Branch's coverage ability...  so with that said, they said the same things about Allen...  (minus his coverage ability)... and I also believe Branch was a good player, he was my guy, and I was "sad" to see him go... but, when you miss 27 out of 32 games, it opens the door for your exit... That's too much money to just waste...

Hence RM cutting Allen, and bringing him back for less money... maybe... just maybe... RM lnows what he's doing, especially after having to let Branch walk for the exact same reasons... injury...

"rant" over... lol...

 dancinman

Yeah, whatever. Branch should of got cut because he was always hurt. He still did a nice job this year filling in KC secondary. I could care less if Allen is on the roster or not in February. Del Rio and Norton know what he can do, they'll decide if he makes the roster, and if he does great.

My point exactly...

 3 
 on: February 12, 2016, 10:12:38 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by Raider 8
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season.  




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Why do you say that?  because he had a good game against us?  Lmao... stop it...

His production went down nearly 60%, from when he was with us...

He had 1 INT, in week 13 vs, guess who?  

Allen had his 1st INT by his 3rd full game...

I loved Branch, not gonna say Allen is better or worse (we can't, he was injured, JUST like Branch always was for us)... But I will say THIS...

Making the notion (IF that's the case) that we somehow "lost out" because we let INJURY-PRONE Branch go... is kind of a reach... Maybe you guys caught amnesia... let me remind you...

HE MISSED 27 OUT OF HIS LAST 32 GAMES IN A RAIDER UNIFORM.

Cmon man...  you guys try any angle you can to shit on this man, even when he does what ANY other GM in the LEAGUE would have done... smdh...

Lmao... Nate Allen just this past season, played in exactly the same amount of games that Tyvon Branch did his last TWO seasons with us... So in REALITY Allen has already evened up the production we "lost" from letting Branch go, except at least Allen had an INT during his 5 games....

Your excuse?  Injury?  Well yea... Allen was injured too... go figure... Can't have the cake and eat it too fellaz... Either you blame a guy for injury, or you don't... The answer is, you don't...

When he's healthy hes a pretty solid back up. Experienced vet, never heard of any locker room problems, not a bad tackler, still has speed to cover some ground. And most importantly the chiefs defense didn't drop off while he was playing

Neither me nor nutmeg even mentioned Allen in either of our posts, and you quote us and go on some rant comparing branch and Allen.








Just because I use more words than you're used to, doesn't make it a "rant"... lol...

And don't insult my intelligence, the post is about Allen, so to bring up Branch can only be in comparison in some way, shape or form... no matter how you (or him) try to spin it AFTER the fact...

I notice you didn't mention anything about Branch's coverage ability...  so with that said, they said the same things about Allen...  (minus his coverage ability)... and I also believe Branch was a good player, he was my guy, and I was "sad" to see him go... but, when you miss 27 out of 32 games, it opens the door for your exit... That's too much money to just waste...

Hence RM cutting Allen, and bringing him back for less money... maybe... just maybe... RM lnows what he's doing, especially after having to let Branch walk for the exact same reasons... injury...

"rant" over... lol...

 dancinman

Yeah, whatever. Branch should of got cut because he was always hurt. He still did a nice job this year filling in KC secondary. I could care less if Allen is on the roster or not in February. Del Rio and Norton know what he can do, they'll decide if he makes the roster, and if he does great.

 4 
 on: February 12, 2016, 10:11:12 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by CC 2
Late Nate back so how much less?
Enough to overlook his out of position play.
Raiders Still need the Safety position upgraded.

 5 
 on: February 12, 2016, 09:58:26 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by CC 2
Nice!
C.Woodson will represent well. Raiders will have
A voice on the program. Cool

 6 
 on: February 12, 2016, 09:19:38 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by varaider
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season.  




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Why do you say that?  because he had a good game against us?  Lmao... stop it...

His production went down nearly 60%, from when he was with us...

He had 1 INT, in week 13 vs, guess who?  

Allen had his 1st INT by his 3rd full game...

I loved Branch, not gonna say Allen is better or worse (we can't, he was injured, JUST like Branch always was for us)... But I will say THIS...

Making the notion (IF that's the case) that we somehow "lost out" because we let INJURY-PRONE Branch go... is kind of a reach... Maybe you guys caught amnesia... let me remind you...

HE MISSED 27 OUT OF HIS LAST 32 GAMES IN A RAIDER UNIFORM.

Cmon man...  you guys try any angle you can to shit on this man, even when he does what ANY other GM in the LEAGUE would have done... smdh...

Lmao... Nate Allen just this past season, played in exactly the same amount of games that Tyvon Branch did his last TWO seasons with us... So in REALITY Allen has already evened up the production we "lost" from letting Branch go, except at least Allen had an INT during his 5 games....

Your excuse?  Injury?  Well yea... Allen was injured too... go figure... Can't have the cake and eat it too fellaz... Either you blame a guy for injury, or you don't... The answer is, you don't...

When he's healthy hes a pretty solid back up. Experienced vet, never heard of any locker room problems, not a bad tackler, still has speed to cover some ground. And most importantly the chiefs defense didn't drop off while he was playing

Neither me nor nutmeg even mentioned Allen in either of our posts, and you quote us and go on some rant comparing branch and Allen.








Just because I use more words than you're used to, doesn't make it a "rant"... lol...

And don't insult my intelligence, the post is about Allen, so to bring up Branch can only be in comparison in some way, shape or form... no matter how you (or him) try to spin it AFTER the fact...

I notice you didn't mention anything about Branch's coverage ability...  so with that said, they said the same things about Allen...  (minus his coverage ability)... and I also believe Branch was a good player, he was my guy, and I was "sad" to see him go... but, when you miss 27 out of 32 games, it opens the door for your exit... That's too much money to just waste...

Hence RM cutting Allen, and bringing him back for less money... maybe... just maybe... RM lnows what he's doing, especially after having to let Branch walk for the exact same reasons... injury...

"rant" over... lol...

 dancinman

 7 
 on: February 12, 2016, 08:58:10 PM 
Started by RaiderInDenver - Last post by varaider
Matter of fact... here... use HIS words...

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/VoeHmyfFSEI&rel=0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/VoeHmyfFSEI&rel=0</a>

"What makes your way , right?"

 8 
 on: February 12, 2016, 06:54:59 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by Raider 8
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season. 




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Why do you say that?  because he had a good game against us?  Lmao... stop it...

His production went down nearly 60%, from when he was with us...

He had 1 INT, in week 13 vs, guess who? 

Allen had his 1st INT by his 3rd full game...

I loved Branch, not gonna say Allen is better or worse (we can't, he was injured, JUST like Branch always was for us)... But I will say THIS...

Making the notion (IF that's the case) that we somehow "lost out" because we let INJURY-PRONE Branch go... is kind of a reach... Maybe you guys caught amnesia... let me remind you...

HE MISSED 27 OUT OF HIS LAST 32 GAMES IN A RAIDER UNIFORM.

Cmon man...  you guys try any angle you can to shit on this man, even when he does what ANY other GM in the LEAGUE would have done... smdh...

Lmao... Nate Allen just this past season, played in exactly the same amount of games that Tyvon Branch did his last TWO seasons with us... So in REALITY Allen has already evened up the production we "lost" from letting Branch go, except at least Allen had an INT during his 5 games....

Your excuse?  Injury?  Well yea... Allen was injured too... go figure... Can't have the cake and eat it too fellaz... Either you blame a guy for injury, or you don't... The answer is, you don't...

When he's healthy hes a pretty solid back up. Experienced vet, never heard of any locker room problems, not a bad tackler, still has speed to cover some ground. And most importantly the chiefs defense didn't drop off while he was playing

Neither me nor nutmeg even mentioned Allen in either of our posts, and you quote us and go on some rant comparing branch and Allen.







 9 
 on: February 12, 2016, 06:35:04 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by varaider
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season. 




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Why do you say that?  because he had a good game against us?  Lmao... stop it...

His production went down nearly 60%, from when he was with us...

He had 1 INT, in week 13 vs, guess who? 

Allen had his 1st INT by his 3rd full game...

I loved Branch, not gonna say Allen is better or worse (we can't, he was injured, JUST like Branch always was for us)... But I will say THIS...

Making the notion (IF that's the case) that we somehow "lost out" because we let INJURY-PRONE Branch go... is kind of a reach... Maybe you guys caught amnesia... let me remind you...

HE MISSED 27 OUT OF HIS LAST 32 GAMES IN A RAIDER UNIFORM.

Cmon man...  you guys try any angle you can to shit on this man, even when he does what ANY other GM in the LEAGUE would have done... smdh...

Lmao... Nate Allen just this past season, played in exactly the same amount of games that Tyvon Branch did his last TWO seasons with us... So in REALITY Allen has already evened up the production we "lost" from letting Branch go, except at least Allen had an INT during his 5 games....

Your excuse?  Injury?  Well yea... Allen was injured too... go figure... Can't have the cake and eat it too fellaz... Either you blame a guy for injury, or you don't... The answer is, you don't...  Until Allen gives us a full season, you really can't say whether or not he helped or hurt us ON THE FIELD... but you can say he gave us more, in one season, than Branch gave us in 2...

 10 
 on: February 12, 2016, 05:04:11 PM 
Started by Raider 8 - Last post by Raider 8
BTW Tyvon Branch worked out pretty good for KC last season. 




He did, that's good depth right there, they didn't skip a beat with him in there

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.115 seconds with 17 queries.