Football Oakland Raiders sign.... - Page 2

thabear04 · 03-31-2014, 07:04 PM

Another old vet Carlos Rogers signs contract with Oakland Raiders

The Oakland Raiders have locked down another veteran in their ongoing roster rebuild.

The team announced Monday that it has signed former San Francisco 49ers cornerback Carlos Rogers. The Raiders offered visual proof via social media:

Rogers will turn 33 in July and is entering his 11th NFL season. He spent the last three seasons with the San Francisco 49ers, starting all 48 regular-season games he appeared in under Jim Harbaugh. Rogers saw his role diminished in the postseason following a hamstring injury and was cut three weeks ago in a move that created $5.1 million in cap space for San Francisco.

Rogers represents another short-term fix for general manager Reggie McKenzie. With Tarell Brown and D.J. Hayden locked into roles on the outside, expect Rogers to do most of his work out of the slot.

Coochie liquor · 04-01-2014, 04:45 AM

Looks like an almost completely new roster in Jokeland. Should be interesting this season.

Mecca · 04-01-2014, 05:12 AM

They just signed 2 of the top 3 CB's on the 49ers roster this past season, can't really say that's a bad thing.

That's gonna be a better team, there's no question.

Messier · 04-01-2014, 05:47 AM

The Raiders are better. Yes they added talent, but this offseason is like a handbook in how to spend money just to spend money. Compare what the Raiders did to the Broncos. The Broncos signed pretty young, still in their prime players, that their former team would've loved to keep. I'm trying to think of the player Oakland signed that their former team wasn't like, meh, go ahead, we're fine. Brown maybe?

Mecca · 04-01-2014, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

The Raiders are better. Yes they added talent, but this offseason is like a handbook in how to spend money just to spend money. Compare what the Raiders did to the Broncos. The Broncos signed pretty young, still in their prime players, that their former team would've loved to keep. I'm trying to think of the player Oakland signed that their former team wasn't like, meh, go ahead, we're fine. Brown maybe?

Well when you have 70 million to spend you have to spend money to spend money. I don't think they've signed any bad contracts short front loaded deals don't kill teams.

Marco Polo · 04-01-2014, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iconic

Sometimes this makes me wonder how the NFL is tax exempt.... Non-Profit my ass.

I think you are confused. The league office is non-profit but the individual teams pay taxes. The vast majority of the money is held with the teams.

htismaqe · 04-01-2014, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Well when you have 70 million to spend you have to spend money to spend money. I don't think they've signed any bad contracts short front loaded deals don't kill teams.

I mentioned this the other day but nobody was apparently paying attention.

The Raiders HAVE to spend money. They were teetering on having to pay fines for hoarding too much money...

Mecca · 04-01-2014, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I mentioned this the other day but nobody was apparently paying attention.

The Raiders HAVE to spend money. They were teetering on having to pay fines for hoarding too much money...

Yep, so they're in position to front load short deals to vets because they have to.

I think at the end of the day they're a better team now than they were at the end of the season.

ct · 04-01-2014, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TribalElder

I was expecting jacque schiitt

Back off!! All you're schiitts are belong too us!

lawrenceRaider · 04-01-2014, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

The Raiders are better. Yes they added talent, but this offseason is like a handbook in how to spend money just to spend money. Compare what the Raiders did to the Broncos. The Broncos signed pretty young, still in their prime players, that their former team would've loved to keep. I'm trying to think of the player Oakland signed that their former team wasn't like, meh, go ahead, we're fine. Brown maybe?

Which young, in their prime players did the Donks sign? I must have missed those signings.

Oakland signed some vets, who still should have a couple good years left, and didnt' break the bank signing them. Oakland looks to have similar cap room next offseason as well. How about the Chiefs? Well, giving a player like Bowe over 11 mill per season is hamstringing your ability to sign players to fill the gaps in your squad.

htismaqe · 04-01-2014, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

Which young, in their prime players did the Donks sign? I must have missed those signings.

Oakland signed some vets, who still should have a couple good years left, and didnt' break the bank signing them. Oakland looks to have similar cap room next offseason as well. How about the Chiefs? Well, giving a player like Bowe over 11 mill per season is hamstringing your ability to sign players to fill the gaps in your squad.

The Broncos signed TJ Ward and Emmanuel Sanders, both ascending players just entering their primes...

Simplicity · 04-01-2014, 08:03 AM

The Raiders had to spend the money... Don't give me the "At least they are trying" bullshit...

Mecca · 04-01-2014, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplicity

The Raiders had to spend the money... Don't give me the "At least they are trying" bullshit...

Well we had cap room like that when Pioli was here and he sat around with his thumb up his ass.

Messier · 04-01-2014, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplicity

The Raiders had to spend the money... Don't give me the "At least they are trying" bullshit...

Agreed. I'm not saying the Raiders aren't better, but they HAD to spend money. And they got a bunch of people you can say, hey, I know his name, about. They had a few savvy signings, but most seem like they are about 4 years too late.

MTG#10 · 04-01-2014, 08:25 AM

My Saints fan coworker just told me the raiders just traded 3 picks for Jimmy Graham?

Eleazar · 04-01-2014, 08:27 AM

The Raiders are spending money, but that hasn't made the Redskins contenders in the past, nor did it work for the Eagles when they were being called the "dream team" a few years ago.

Talent without coaching and leadership isn't going to take them anywhere, we'll see if they have either of those in quantity.

03-31-2014, 07:04 PM
thabear04 MTFU Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The Valley Heat Casino cash: $5680450	Oakland Raiders sign.... Another old vet Carlos Rogers signs contract with Oakland Raiders The Oakland Raiders have locked down another veteran in their ongoing roster rebuild. The team announced Monday that it has signed former San Francisco 49ers cornerback Carlos Rogers. The Raiders offered visual proof via social media: Rogers will turn 33 in July and is entering his 11th NFL season. He spent the last three seasons with the San Francisco 49ers, starting all 48 regular-season games he appeared in under Jim Harbaugh. Rogers saw his role diminished in the postseason following a hamstring injury and was cut three weeks ago in a move that created $5.1 million in cap space for San Francisco. Rogers represents another short-term fix for general manager Reggie McKenzie. With Tarell Brown and D.J. Hayden locked into roles on the outside, expect Rogers to do most of his work out of the slot.
Posts: 7,230

04-01-2014, 04:45 AM	#16
Coochie liquor Bolton gonna knock you out Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Free Vybz Kartel Casino cash: $2692394	Looks like an almost completely new roster in Jokeland. Should be interesting this season.
Posts: 20,426

04-01-2014, 05:12 AM	#17
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2607050	They just signed 2 of the top 3 CB's on the 49ers roster this past season, can't really say that's a bad thing. That's gonna be a better team, there's no question.
Posts: 110,947

04-01-2014, 05:47 AM	#18
Messier MVP Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $10005050	The Raiders are better. Yes they added talent, but this offseason is like a handbook in how to spend money just to spend money. Compare what the Raiders did to the Broncos. The Broncos signed pretty young, still in their prime players, that their former team would've loved to keep. I'm trying to think of the player Oakland signed that their former team wasn't like, meh, go ahead, we're fine. Brown maybe?
Posts: 7,610

04-01-2014, 08:03 AM	#26
Simplicity Iowa B1G West Champs Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Front Range of Colorado Casino cash: $9580151	The Raiders had to spend the money... Don't give me the "At least they are trying" bullshit...
Posts: 3,693

04-01-2014, 08:25 AM	#29
MTG#10 Mammoth penis Join Date: May 2006 Location: Springfield Casino cash: $7514386	My Saints fan coworker just told me the raiders just traded 3 picks for Jimmy Graham?
Posts: 11,429

04-01-2014, 08:27 AM	#30
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	The Raiders are spending money, but that hasn't made the Redskins contenders in the past, nor did it work for the Eagles when they were being called the "dream team" a few years ago. Talent without coaching and leadership isn't going to take them anywhere, we'll see if they have either of those in quantity.
Posts: 80,659