If This Season Is A Failure…..

[Velo]

I still don't like our depth on defense and at WR. But it's always possible some upgrades will be made - if actually needed - up until the trade deadline.

I think the Chargers have the deepest WR corps in the league. There is a reason they made signing MW a priority and didn't make any additions or changes to WR in free agency and the draft. When you have a QB who is 2nd in passing yardage only to the GOAT, it's a good bet that he has pretty good WRs.

[blueman]

I still don't like our depth on defense and at WR. But it's always possible some upgrades will be made - if actually needed - up until the trade deadline.

WR depth is really about signing a new TE plus drafting pass-catching RBs out of the backfield to add to Ekeler’s production. But even still, agree after our first 3 WRs we have nobodies and gimmick guys. Be nice if one of them stepped up if needed, not holding my breath (and praying for no serious injuries for those top 3…).

[chargeroo]

I still don't like our depth on defense and at WR. But it's always possible some upgrades will be made - if actually needed - up until the trade deadline.

Will Fuller and Julio Jones are still available. I'm not endorsing them, just saying there's still a chance they could add another WR.

[dmac_bolt]

I disagree with this kind of blanket statement.

First, what constitutes a "failure" has not been defined.

Once defined, an analysis has to be made of the degree of failure and of the reasons why the season was a failure.

For example, what if Herbert gets injured for the season in week 1? If that happens, our expectations should be adjusted substantially downward and the lesser result would not necessarily be the fault of either Telesco or Staley. Or what happens if everyone stays healthy but we fall just short, losing, say, in Buffalo in overtime in the AFCCG? Is that season a "failure"?

On the other hand, if the Staley defense, even with all of the talent we brought in, fails miserably, I would be fine cutting ties with Staley if we conclude that the issues are scheme related, but my bias is that I prefer more aggressive attacking defenses like those played by BAL and PIT over the years and like we used to play under Wade Phillips. I do not care for our light box, who cares about the run, let them move the ball down the field defense (at least not the way we have played it so far).

If there are key injuries that cost us because we lack quality depth, then I would need to look at why we lacked that quality depth. If the shortcoming is Telesco's fault, then he should be fired. For example, if we sucked at ILB, I would be forgiving of Telesco in part because Murray was a highly rated player entering the league. So, if Murray failed, to me, that is not all on Telesco as a lot of people had that wrong. I differentiate between a pick like that versus some of his big reaches versus consensus big boards when many people viewed the player as being worse and Telesco ignored them and took the player with an earlier than warranted pick anyway. However, if Murray fails because of injury, then I would fault Telesco for the ILB position sucking because based upon the information available, it appears that we could have re-signed Kyzir White for not a lot of money, so that lack of quality depth in an injury to Murray situation is on Telesco.

In any event, I think an analysis of the degree to which the team failed and why the team failed must be performed before any conclusions can be reached.

I don’t know how, but I knew we could count on you for a 7-paragraph rebuttal that both rejects the hypothesis and hedges a possible adoption of the hypothesis at the same time.

I stand with the categorical rejectors. Onward to Victory!

[Velo]

When it was 4th & 6 in OT in the final game, with the ball at the 23, I was expecting Staley to go for it. I'm sure he was tempted. He had Hopkins kick a FG instead to tie the game, and the Raiders' offense got another chance. Do you think Staley should have gone for it on that 4th & 6?

I kind of do. Just tying the game gives the ball back to the Raiders' offense. Your defense is tired. It can't stop the run. And all the Raiders will need to win is a FG (and they have a really good kicker). I'm sure Staley not wanting to get second-guessed and brutally criticized for going for it in that situation, if Herbert failed to convert, factored into his decision. But, IMO, and not just in hindsight because I was thinking "go for it!" at the time, he should have put the game in the offense's hands, rather than rely on the defense to save it.

The Raiders' D was dog tired. Herbert had converted multiple 4th downs in the final three drives. On the previous play MW came really close to ending it with a ball he almost got in the end zone. IMO, Herbert and the Chargers' offense could've done whatever they wanted at that point. I think the odds of the offense converting then scoring a TD were better than the defense stopping the Raiders' D from getting into FG range.

[sonorajim]

We have two WRs that are consistently in the 100 / 1000 range. They are just that good. It's hard for anyone else to post big numbers with them getting open. Maybe we can reduce their snaps with a lead. Palmer, Guyton need to show up when called on.
Ekeler is one of the best pass catching RBs in the NFL. Spiller may be similar. Not as good but good.
The TEs will be interesting.

D can help. Protect leads, give O more possessions.
STs - field position, +.

[Maniaque 6]

When it was 4th & 6 in OT in the final game, with the ball at the 23, I was expecting Staley to go for it. I'm sure he was tempted. He had Hopkins kick a FG instead to tie the game, and the Raiders' offense got another chance. Do you think Staley should have gone for it on that 4th & 6?

I kind of do. Just tying the game gives the ball back to the Raiders' offense. Your defense is tired. It can't stop the run. And all the Raiders will need to win is a FG (and they have a really good kicker). I'm sure Staley not wanting to get second-guessed and brutally criticized for going for it in that situation, if Herbert failed to convert, factored into his decision. But, IMO, and not just in hindsight because I was thinking "go for it!" at the time, he should have put the game in the offense's hands, rather than rely on the defense to save it.

The Raiders' D was dog tired. Herbert had converted multiple 4th downs in the final three drives. On the previous play MW came really close to ending it with a ball he almost got in the end zone. IMO, Herbert and the Chargers' offense could've done whatever they wanted at that point. I think the odds of the offense converting then scoring a TD were better than the defense stopping the Raiders' D from getting into FG range.

My preferences

1- Going for it on a 4th and 6 in OT with the ball at the opponent 23
2- Going for two points on the last play of the regulation







117- Going for it on a 4th down at your 18 !

[Velo]

My preferences

1- Going for it on a 4th and 6 in OT with the ball at the opponent 23
2- Going for two points on the last play of the regulation







117- Going for it on a 4th down at your 18 !

Agreed 100 percent. I didn't think about going for two after the last TD in regulation. The Raiders' D had been on the field for two long, draining drives at the end of the game. A 2-pt conversion right there to win might've had the best percentage of success. Yeah, going for it on 4th down deep in your own territory early in the game, I thought that was a bad decision - and it led to an easy, immediate 3 pts for the Raiders that came back to bite Staley hard in the a**!

[Lefty2SLO]

I don’t know how, but I knew we could count on you for a 7-paragraph rebuttal that both rejects the hypothesis and hedges a possible adoption of the hypothesis at the same time.

I stand with the categorical rejectors. Onward to Victory!

I DID say he can be VERY creative!

[Lefty2SLO]

When it was 4th & 6 in OT in the final game, with the ball at the 23, I was expecting Staley to go for it. I'm sure he was tempted. He had Hopkins kick a FG instead to tie the game, and the Raiders' offense got another chance. Do you think Staley should have gone for it on that 4th & 6?

I kind of do. Just tying the game gives the ball back to the Raiders' offense. Your defense is tired. It can't stop the run. And all the Raiders will need to win is a FG (and they have a really good kicker). I'm sure Staley not wanting to get second-guessed and brutally criticized for going for it in that situation, if Herbert failed to convert, factored into his decision. But, IMO, and not just in hindsight because I was thinking "go for it!" at the time, he should have put the game in the offense's hands, rather than rely on the defense to save it.

The Raiders' D was dog tired. Herbert had converted multiple 4th downs in the final three drives. On the previous play MW came really close to ending it with a ball he almost got in the end zone. IMO, Herbert and the Chargers' offense could've done whatever they wanted at that point. I think the odds of the offense converting then scoring a TD were better than the defense stopping the Raiders' D from getting into FG range.

YES. I was pissed he didn't go for it there. I knew what would happen if we tied the score - I'm a long time Charger fan and I've seen that movie too many times. I was shocked he abandoned his aggressive ways at the most critical point. Maybe he thought he'd pushed his luck hard enough? IDK - but I would have rather the team failed on that 4th down than die another slow agonizing death by shit defense (again).

[BlazingBolt]

I heard it reported on locked on LA Chargers podcast that Chargers are like one of 3 teams Peyton would be interested in coming out of retirement for.

so your saying there’s a chance

to be clear I like Staley but likability and culture don’t mean squat if you miss the playoffs two years in a row with Justin Herbert. This is an IF thread and if your worried and don’t like this thread because your worried about jinxes you just might stupidstitious

failing this year would be an epic disaster and heads will have to roll. In that situation hiring Peyton would restore my hope

[DerwinBosa]

I heard it reported on locked on LA Chargers podcast that Chargers are like one of 3 teams Peyton would be interested in coming out of retirement for.

so your saying there’s a chance

to be clear I like Staley but likability and culture don’t mean squat if you miss the playoffs two years in a row with Justin Herbert. This is an IF thread and if your worried and don’t like this thread because your worried about jinxes you just might stupidstitious

failing this year would be an epic disaster and heads will have to roll. In that situation hiring Peyton would restore my hope

It's Sean PAYTON. Whenever someone spells it PEYTON I immediately think of a rumor starting that PEYTON Manning will head a group looking to buy the Chargers. Obviously that will most likely never happen, but it's what enters mind.