calumnus said:

---

I like the Lance dice roll, not sure they had to move from #12 to get him, but we will never know.

Fields went #11, Jones went #15 (to the Patriots).

---

That's why we know they didn't have to make the trade. Remember that the teams that would have been ahead of them (esp. Miami and Phili) still had the opportunity to get a QB and did not. And I don't think they would have taken Lance had SF not made the trade. The question is, would NE have made the trade had SF not done it. Well, NE had the opportunity and let Chicago trade ahead of them. So, again the answer would be no. So really it is pretty clear that SF made a huge reach in order to get a QB that would have likely dropped to them. At the very least, they probably get Fields at #12.

So, if SF feels that Lance was so much better than Fields and Jones that it was worth giving up all of that, then I guess it made sense. But it is insane to think that.

The 49ers have so much else going for them that this blunder won't go noticed this season. But it is going to start to hurt later.

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

If the niners had stayed at 12, they would have had their choice of Jones and maybe Lance. ( Chicago might have taken Lance aheAd of Fields. At first blush, the price was too high. According to greg Papa, Kyle was overruled by Lynch and the rest of the personnel dept. Jimmy is now stuck on the team. There or may or not be a locker-room split..There is surely a split between Kyle and everyone else. How bad can Jones be if NE took him at 15????By all accounts, lance is a quality kid....now...can he be a quality QB???

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

I like the Lance dice roll, not sure they had to move from #12 to get him, but we will never know.

Fields went #11, Jones went #15 (to the Patriots).

---

That's why we know they didn't have to make the trade. Remember that the teams that would have been ahead of them (esp. Miami and Phili) still had the opportunity to get a QB and did not. And I don't think they would have taken Lance had SF not made the trade. The question is, would NE have made the trade had SF not done it. Well, NE had the opportunity and let Chicago trade ahead of them. So, again the answer would be no. So really it is pretty clear that SF made a huge reach in order to get a QB that would have likely dropped to them. At the very least, they probably get Fields at #12.

So, if SF feels that Lance was so much better than Fields and Jones that it was worth giving up all of that, then I guess it made sense. But it is insane to think that.

The 49ers have so much else going for them that this blunder won't go noticed this season. But it is going to start to hurt later.

---

They are going to have to be good at finding and trading for overlooked players. Going after free agents. This trade was the opposite of moneyball, but that is what they need to do now. If they do that AND Lance pans out they will be praised.

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

1. Not a Raiders fan
2. The Raiders pick was stupid. If somebody wants to start a thread on a California board to discuss a Nevada football team. The Raiders' management is a joke. And I don't care.
3. Anyone that roots for both 49ers and Raiders is a wuss.
4. Not based on jealousy. I was an avid Raider fan when the Raiders were the winningest franchise in sports. At the time things were fairly amicable between the two. When the 49ers, after years of sucking started putting things together I had no vested interest, but was happy for my Bay Area friends. Then their years of pent up jealousy of the Raiders came out and they were total asshats. I went from mildly rooting for them to putting them below Denver and KC in a month. Then when the Raiders moved the bandwagon...Er...faithful turned the screws hard on Raider fans. As a much bigger Cal fan than Raider fan, my ranking of hate was USC, then Stanford, then a fictional team made up of the worst attributes of USC and Stanford put together, then on top the 49ers.
5. I no longer care enough to actively hate the 49ers, but it is mildly amusing to watch them be stupid because their fans are still asshats.
6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?
7. My comparison to Ayoob was that Ayoob played for an extremely overpowered team at the JC level, was very inexperienced, had huge success, was rated a 5 star, and was then trying to make a big jump. Frankly, the jump from SF City to Cal was not as big as FCS to the NFL. People are extrapolating dominant play at a much lower level to a higher level and that is baseless. Of course he looks good at FCS. Mostly I compared him to Ayoob to be obnoxious.
8. The pick was a heavy reach at 3, but if he was truly the guy they liked, AND THEY HAD THE #3, take him.
9. Trading all that was moronic especially given they could have gotten Jones at 12.
10. Committing to an inexperienced FCS QB as the franchise and not having picks to help him is stupid.
11. The Raiders pick was stupid, but at least they didn't trade 4 picks to be stupid.
12. If it is true that shanahan wanted Jones and everyone pushed him to Lance, they better hope that Lance works out and really better hope that Jones does not or that organization is going to implode.

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

1. Not a Raiders fan
2. The Raiders pick was stupid. If somebody wants to start a thread on a California board to discuss a Nevada football team. The Raiders' management is a joke. And I don't care.
3. Anyone that roots for both 49ers and Raiders is a wuss.
4. Not based on jealousy. I was an avid Raider fan when the Raiders were the winningest franchise in sports. At the time things were fairly amicable between the two. When the 49ers, after years of sucking started putting things together I had no vested interest, but was happy for my Bay Area friends. Then their years of pent up jealousy of the Raiders came out and they were total asshats. I went from mildly rooting for them to putting them below Denver and KC in a month. Then when the Raiders moved the bandwagon...Er...faithful turned the screws hard on Raider fans. As a much bigger Cal fan than Raider fan, my ranking of hate was USC, then Stanford, then a fictional team made up of the worst attributes of USC and Stanford put together, then on top the 49ers.
5. I no longer care enough to actively hate the 49ers, but it is mildly amusing to watch them be stupid because their fans are still asshats.
6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?
7. My comparison to Ayoob was that Ayoob played for an extremely overpowered team at the JC level, was very inexperienced, had huge success, was rated a 5 star, and was then trying to make a big jump. Frankly, the jump from SF City to Cal was not as big as FCS to the NFL. People are extrapolating dominant play at a much lower level to a higher level and that is baseless. Of course he looks good at FCS. Mostly I compared him to Ayoob to be obnoxious.
8. The pick was a heavy reach at 3, but if he was truly the guy they liked, AND THEY HAD THE #3, take him.
9. Trading all that was moronic especially given they could have gotten Jones at 12.
10. Committing to an inexperienced FCS QB as the franchise and not having picks to help him is stupid.
11. The Raiders pick was stupid, but at least they didn't trade 4 picks to be stupid.
12. If it is true that shanahan wanted Jones and everyone pushed him to Lance, they better hope that Lance works out and really better hope that Jones does not or that organization is going to implode.

---

Despite the statistical unlikelihood of it, I honestly think all 5 QBs will work out, eventually. Will they all be immediate starters? No. Will they all end up franchise QBs? No. But I think they will all end up being productive players.

I know plenty of Raider and 49er fans that are not jerks. Maybe you are hanging around the wrong crowd. It is true, and unfortunate, that some gang affiliations are partly based on allegiance to either the 49ers or Raiders. And, as gang culture dictates, they must hate everyone else. That is certainly not the average fan. I root for both the Raiders and 49ers and I'm not a wuss, whatever that is. "Not that there's anything wrong with it"

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

It used to be that the Raiders were a big part of marketing for the NFL. Now I'd say that that is true of the 49ers. They sell the NFL better than most teams. If you are going to have a primetime game on your network your better off with

• 49ers
• GB
• Dallas
• Pittsburgh
• LA Rams
• NE
• NO
• Seattle
• KC
• TB --currently

Of course there are non team-specific factors that are important like matchups, rivalries, whose winning at the time and star power. But, all things being equal, the 49ers are one of 10 teams the nation wants to see (regardless of love or hate). The Raiders were 1 of 10 back in the day. Now they are one of the last teams you want to see.

Back in the day (when the Raiders were winning SBs), the Raiders were the face of the NFL along with:

• Cowboys
• Vikings
• Denver
• Rams
• Miami
• Pittsburgh
• Houston (Oilers)
• San Diego
• Philadelphia

From an ownership standpoint there also has been a big flip. Al Davis from the 50s-80s was a big reason why the Raiders could be referred to as the winningest team in football. From the 80s on, Davis' age and declining health, including mental health, was reflected in the team's steady decline. In the meantime, SF thrived under the spend happy Debartolo regime.

In the 90s both teams had periods decline and success. The 49ers struggled to maintain the same standard after Eddie was forced to hand ownership over to his sister and brother in law. The York regime made a lot of mistakes and still struggles to get back to the level under Eddie. In the meantime, Al Davis' son, Mark has had equal struggles. The difference is that, over the last 2 decades, the York's seem to be able to learn from their mistakes, eventually. For example, they finally have put in place a well respected and classy administration that is developing a culture where relationships matter. Mark Davis, on the other, does not seem to learn much from his mistakes, although I think his move to LV may end up being a smart one.

Over the coming years, I have a lot more faith that the 49ers will continue to improve as an organization, whereas I don't see any chance of that happening with the Raiders under Mark Davis.

BTW, as much as the 49ers gave up to get Lance, it will never be any where near the over-reach the Raiders made to get Gruden. I don't know how much the Raiders have payed Gruden for each of his wins, but it has to be close to a million dollars.

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

1. Not a Raiders fan
2. The Raiders pick was stupid. If somebody wants to start a thread on a California board to discuss a Nevada football team. The Raiders' management is a joke. And I don't care.
3. Anyone that roots for both 49ers and Raiders is a wuss.
4. Not based on jealousy. I was an avid Raider fan when the Raiders were the winningest franchise in sports. At the time things were fairly amicable between the two. When the 49ers, after years of sucking started putting things together I had no vested interest, but was happy for my Bay Area friends. Then their years of pent up jealousy of the Raiders came out and they were total asshats. I went from mildly rooting for them to putting them below Denver and KC in a month. Then when the Raiders moved the bandwagon...Er...faithful turned the screws hard on Raider fans. As a much bigger Cal fan than Raider fan, my ranking of hate was USC, then Stanford, then a fictional team made up of the worst attributes of USC and Stanford put together, then on top the 49ers.
5. I no longer care enough to actively hate the 49ers, but it is mildly amusing to watch them be stupid because their fans are still asshats.
6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?
7. My comparison to Ayoob was that Ayoob played for an extremely overpowered team at the JC level, was very inexperienced, had huge success, was rated a 5 star, and was then trying to make a big jump. Frankly, the jump from SF City to Cal was not as big as FCS to the NFL. People are extrapolating dominant play at a much lower level to a higher level and that is baseless. Of course he looks good at FCS. Mostly I compared him to Ayoob to be obnoxious.
8. The pick was a heavy reach at 3, but if he was truly the guy they liked, AND THEY HAD THE #3, take him.
9. Trading all that was moronic especially given they could have gotten Jones at 12.
10. Committing to an inexperienced FCS QB as the franchise and not having picks to help him is stupid.
11. The Raiders pick was stupid, but at least they didn't trade 4 picks to be stupid.
12. If it is true that shanahan wanted Jones and everyone pushed him to Lance, they better hope that Lance works out and really better hope that Jones does not or that organization is going to implode.

---

Despite the statistical unlikelihood of it, I honestly think all 5 QBs will work out, eventually. Will they all be immediate starters? No. Will they all end up franchise QBs? No. But I think they will all end up being productive players.

I know plenty of Raider and 49er fans that are not jerks. Maybe you are hanging around the wrong crowd. It is true, and unfortunate, that some gang affiliations are partly based on allegiance to either the 49ers or Raiders. And, as gang culture dictates, they must hate everyone else. That is certainly not the average fan. I root for both the Raiders and 49ers and I'm not a wuss, whatever that is. "Not that there's anything wrong with it"

---

Plenty of 49er fans are not jerks. They are just jerks when they are 49er fans.

If the quarterbacks were journey's:

Lawrence - ultimately really good. Starts as Apollo13 ends as Apollo 11
Wilson - Titanic - steerage class, locked below deck while ship goes down.
Lance - Titanic - got on a life boat
Fields - Hindenburg
Jones - Trip to Europe economy class, stay at youth hostels. Enjoyed yourself without frills.

Stand by my statement about Raider-49er fans.

heartofthebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

It used to be that the Raiders were a big part of marketing for the NFL. Now I'd say that that is true of the 49ers. They sell the NFL better than most teams. If you are going to have a primetime game on your network your better off with

• 49ers
• GB
• Dallas
• Pittsburgh
• LA Rams
• NE
• NO
• Seattle
• KC
• TB --currently

Of course there are non team-specific factors that are important like matchups, rivalries, whose winning at the time and star power. But, all things being equal, the 49ers are one of 10 teams the nation wants to see (regardless of love or hate). The Raiders were 1 of 10 back in the day. Now they are one of the last teams you want to see.

Back in the day (when the Raiders were winning SBs), the Raiders were the face of the NFL along with:

• Cowboys
• Vikings
• Denver
• Rams
• Miami
• Pittsburgh
• Houston (Oilers)
• San Diego
• Philadelphia

From an ownership standpoint there also has been a big flip. Al Davis from the 50s-80s was a big reason why the Raiders could be referred to as the winningest team in football. From the 80s on, Davis' age and declining health, including mental health, was reflected in the team's steady decline. In the meantime, SF thrived under the spend happy Debartolo regime.

In the 90s both teams had periods decline and success. The 49ers struggled to maintain the same standard after Eddie was forced to hand ownership over to his sister and brother in law. The York regime made a lot of mistakes and still struggles to get back to the level under Eddie. In the meantime, Al Davis' son, Mark has had equal struggles. The difference is that, over the last 2 decades, the York's seem to be able to learn from their mistakes, eventually. For example, they finally have put in place a well respected and classy administration that is developing a culture where relationships matter. Mark Davis, on the other, does not seem to learn much from his mistakes, although I think his move to LV may end up being a smart one.

Over the coming years, I have a lot more faith that the 49ers will continue to improve as an organization, whereas I don't see any chance of that happening with the Raiders under Mark Davis.

BTW, as much as the 49ers gave up to get Lance, it will never be any where near the over-reach the Raiders made to get Gruden. I don't know how much the Raiders have payed Gruden for each of his wins, but it has to be close to a million dollars.

---

You can say what you think is true based on truthiness and gut feel or you can actually look up data. Ratings by team:

Average 2020 NFL National TV Ratings By Team
Dallas Cowboys 19.3m
New Orleans Saints 18.3m
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 18.3m
Seattle Seahawks 17.5m
Las Vegas Raiders 17.1m
Pittsburgh Steelers 16.8m
New England Patriots 16.2m
Kansas City Chiefs 16m
San Francisco 49ers 16m
Green Bay Packers 15.5m
Baltimore Ravens 14.9m
Chicago Bears 14.9m
Los Angeles Chargers 14.8m
Philadelphia Eagles 14m
Los Angeles Rams 14m
Buffalo Bills 13.9m
New York Giants 13.9m
Minnesota Vikings 13.3m
Arizona Cardinals 12.8m
Indianapolis Colts 12.2m
Carolina Panthers 11.7m
Atlanta Falcons 10.2m
Tennessee Titans 10.2m
New York Jets 7.6m
Denver Broncos 6.6m
Miami Dolphins 5.4m
Jacksonville Jaguars 5.4m

The 49er ownership has been a disaster since Debartolo left.
Mark Davis is a disaster of an owner. And he got someone else to build a stadium for him that is a million times better than the one York paid for.

As for success, that is easy to measure because what you and I think doesn't make a bit of difference. Luckily they play these things out on Sundays. Since Jed drove Harbaugh off, the 49ers are 36-60 (.375) and the Raiders are 44-52 (.458). The Raiders have had a better record 3 of the 6 years. The 49ers 1. They had the same record 2 years. The Raiders topped out at 12-4. The 49ers 13-3. By wins and losses, the Raiders have done quite a bit better, but I'll give you that the one year the 49ers didn't suck, they went to the Superbowl.

Your comment about the reach on Gruden is just silly. Yes, they absolutely paid too much for Gruden. I wouldn't have done it. But what you pay a coach has almost no impact on how competitive you can be. The Raiders' ownership has to pay $6.5M more per year for a coach than the 49ers. No question that is much better value for the 49ers. But, so what? I guarantee you any team would easily pay much much more cash for the draft picks the 49ers gave up for Lance if they were to become available for cash, which no team would do because they are worth more than cash. There is no way Gruden's salary is a bigger reach than a #3, 2 first round picks, and a fourth round pick, for Lance. Not even close.

Let me explain something. The 49ers and their fans all think they are competitive for the Superbowl next year because they think injuries took them out of it this year. Okay. So wouldn't your goal be to MAKE THIS YEAR'S TEAM BETTER? You have a good, not great, but good QB. Wouldn't you want to shore up the holes you have right now and make a run? Like, for instance, in a draft that is heavy with talented DB's, one of your weakest areas, MAYBE SPEND YOUR #12 ON A DB WHO CAN COME IN AND HELP RIGHT NOW?!?!?! Instead you pick a guy who cannot help you this year. And you give up a pick that could help you next year. And you give up a pick that could help you the year after that. They have significantly wounded their chance to make a run in the next two years for a guy who is a complete dice roll. Further, they are completely overreacting to Jimmy G's injury. Injuries happen to everyone. This is not a trend. He started over 3 and a half years in college without getting injured. He is a proven commodity.

I'll make this prediction. Jimmy G. will have a better season in 2022 than any of the QB's available to the 49ers at 3 (or Jets at 2). Which means they were stupid to not just keep him and pick a corner at 12. Mac Jones will have a better season in 2022 than Lance. Which means they were stupid if they did not want to pick a corner, not just to keep the number 12, pick Jones, and build around him with the two picks they would still have.

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

---

This is pretty misleading. Longshore and Reed were both true freshmen and Levy was not considered anything other than an emergency QB. He was listed as a FB.

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

1. Not a Raiders fan
2. The Raiders pick was stupid. If somebody wants to start a thread on a California board to discuss a Nevada football team. The Raiders' management is a joke. And I don't care.
3. Anyone that roots for both 49ers and Raiders is a wuss.
4. Not based on jealousy. I was an avid Raider fan when the Raiders were the winningest franchise in sports. At the time things were fairly amicable between the two. When the 49ers, after years of sucking started putting things together I had no vested interest, but was happy for my Bay Area friends. Then their years of pent up jealousy of the Raiders came out and they were total asshats. I went from mildly rooting for them to putting them below Denver and KC in a month. Then when the Raiders moved the bandwagon...Er...faithful turned the screws hard on Raider fans. As a much bigger Cal fan than Raider fan, my ranking of hate was USC, then Stanford, then a fictional team made up of the worst attributes of USC and Stanford put together, then on top the 49ers.
5. I no longer care enough to actively hate the 49ers, but it is mildly amusing to watch them be stupid because their fans are still asshats.
6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?
7. My comparison to Ayoob was that Ayoob played for an extremely overpowered team at the JC level, was very inexperienced, had huge success, was rated a 5 star, and was then trying to make a big jump. Frankly, the jump from SF City to Cal was not as big as FCS to the NFL. People are extrapolating dominant play at a much lower level to a higher level and that is baseless. Of course he looks good at FCS. Mostly I compared him to Ayoob to be obnoxious.
8. The pick was a heavy reach at 3, but if he was truly the guy they liked, AND THEY HAD THE #3, take him.
9. Trading all that was moronic especially given they could have gotten Jones at 12.
10. Committing to an inexperienced FCS QB as the franchise and not having picks to help him is stupid.
11. The Raiders pick was stupid, but at least they didn't trade 4 picks to be stupid.
12. If it is true that shanahan wanted Jones and everyone pushed him to Lance, they better hope that Lance works out and really better hope that Jones does not or that organization is going to implode.

---

Despite the statistical unlikelihood of it, I honestly think all 5 QBs will work out, eventually. Will they all be immediate starters? No. Will they all end up franchise QBs? No. But I think they will all end up being productive players.

I know plenty of Raider and 49er fans that are not jerks. Maybe you are hanging around the wrong crowd. It is true, and unfortunate, that some gang affiliations are partly based on allegiance to either the 49ers or Raiders. And, as gang culture dictates, they must hate everyone else. That is certainly not the average fan. I root for both the Raiders and 49ers and I'm not a wuss, whatever that is. "Not that there's anything wrong with it"

---

Honestly, my experience is entirely the opposite of OTB. When I was growing up in the Bay Area the Raiders were in L.A., so I generally didn't think about them. The 49ers were the only game in town, so I rooted for them. When the Raiders returned to Oakland I thought it was cool to have two teams in the area (though it was sad we usually couldn't watch them on TV). Then a few years later I learned that the Raiders fans really HATED the Niners. So from my perspective the Raider fans were jerks.

That's probably not true of either fanbase as a whole, but it's funny how your personal experience colors everything.

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

When are they going to change the name to Santa Clara?

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

hearto said:

---

From an ownership standpoint there also has been a big flip. Al Davis from the 50s-80s was a big reason why the Raiders could be referred to as the winningest team in football. From the 80s on, Davis' age and declining health, including mental health, was reflected in the team's steady decline. In the meantime, SF thrived under the spend happy Debartolo regime.

---

Just a small quibble here. The Raiders didn't win a single game in the 1950s, primarily because they didn't exist in that decade. The Raiders and the AFL started in 1960. The Raiders really didn't start having sustained success until the mid to late 1960s.

Can we just all agree that the Raiders leaving for Vegas is the best thing that has happened for the easy bay in a long time, and move on.

I can respect those who were bitter and heartbroken by the first move, but the second stint in oakland was just @$_@@. The Raiders return was incredibly bad for the city of Oakland and costs the city tens of millions per year in money they don't have. Mt Davis is truly worthless, and the only thing uglier is Mark Davis' crooked bowl cut.

sycasey said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

1. Not a Raiders fan
2. The Raiders pick was stupid. If somebody wants to start a thread on a California board to discuss a Nevada football team. The Raiders' management is a joke. And I don't care.
3. Anyone that roots for both 49ers and Raiders is a wuss.
4. Not based on jealousy. I was an avid Raider fan when the Raiders were the winningest franchise in sports. At the time things were fairly amicable between the two. When the 49ers, after years of sucking started putting things together I had no vested interest, but was happy for my Bay Area friends. Then their years of pent up jealousy of the Raiders came out and they were total asshats. I went from mildly rooting for them to putting them below Denver and KC in a month. Then when the Raiders moved the bandwagon...Er...faithful turned the screws hard on Raider fans. As a much bigger Cal fan than Raider fan, my ranking of hate was USC, then Stanford, then a fictional team made up of the worst attributes of USC and Stanford put together, then on top the 49ers.
5. I no longer care enough to actively hate the 49ers, but it is mildly amusing to watch them be stupid because their fans are still asshats.
6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?
7. My comparison to Ayoob was that Ayoob played for an extremely overpowered team at the JC level, was very inexperienced, had huge success, was rated a 5 star, and was then trying to make a big jump. Frankly, the jump from SF City to Cal was not as big as FCS to the NFL. People are extrapolating dominant play at a much lower level to a higher level and that is baseless. Of course he looks good at FCS. Mostly I compared him to Ayoob to be obnoxious.
8. The pick was a heavy reach at 3, but if he was truly the guy they liked, AND THEY HAD THE #3, take him.
9. Trading all that was moronic especially given they could have gotten Jones at 12.
10. Committing to an inexperienced FCS QB as the franchise and not having picks to help him is stupid.
11. The Raiders pick was stupid, but at least they didn't trade 4 picks to be stupid.
12. If it is true that shanahan wanted Jones and everyone pushed him to Lance, they better hope that Lance works out and really better hope that Jones does not or that organization is going to implode.

---

Despite the statistical unlikelihood of it, I honestly think all 5 QBs will work out, eventually. Will they all be immediate starters? No. Will they all end up franchise QBs? No. But I think they will all end up being productive players.

I know plenty of Raider and 49er fans that are not jerks. Maybe you are hanging around the wrong crowd. It is true, and unfortunate, that some gang affiliations are partly based on allegiance to either the 49ers or Raiders. And, as gang culture dictates, they must hate everyone else. That is certainly not the average fan. I root for both the Raiders and 49ers and I'm not a wuss, whatever that is. "Not that there's anything wrong with it"

---

Honestly, my experience is entirely the opposite of OTB. When I was growing up in the Bay Area the Raiders were in L.A., so I generally didn't think about them. The 49ers were the only game in town, so I rooted for them. When the Raiders returned to Oakland I thought it was cool to have two teams in the area (though it was sad we usually couldn't watch them on TV). Then a few years later I learned that the Raiders fans really HATED the Niners. So from my perspective the Raider fans were jerks.

That's probably not true of either fanbase as a whole, but it's funny how your personal experience colors everything.

---

Of course you would think that. 49er fans were jerks first. Raider fans reciprocated. You got caught in the crossfire.

Let me give you a little 70's fanbase knowledge. There is a reason I make fun of the term "faithful". The 49ers were dreadful in the 70's. Frankly, outside of a few years with Brodie they were never very good, but they were dreadful in the 70's.

Digression - a little family history. My sister who is 8 years older than I am grew up a 49er fan. My parents were 49er fans. At some point my Mom basically said "What the hell are we watching this crap for? The Raiders are actually good." So owing to my parents bandwagoning, I grew up a Raider fan. (Parents mostly rooted for the Raiders, then rooted for both when the 49ers became relevant again).

So, anywho, back to the 70's. I have no idea when the term 49er Faithful was coined. But in the 70's, it definitely referred to the extremely small fanbase that put up with watching that garbage. Frankly, it was used almost derisively and not by Raider fans but by others. (and by others I mean people who became "faithful" in 1981) I'll tell you, those people deserved that Superbowl. They also didn't deserve to have that name attributed to a bunch of bandwagon fans who "oh, yes. I'm faithful. I've been a fan since 1981!" And I have no problem with those fans from the 70's. Back then the Raiders and 49ers always played each other preseason. the joke was that the 49er fans would start cheering for the Raiders in the second half when they were getting trounced. But those fans that joined the party in 1981 - total asshats.

So you grew up and the Raiders were in Los Angeles. Let me explain to something to you. The Raiders and Oakland fans had an incredibly special relationship. In those days there were bars and restaurants you could go to where people knew they could hang out with players. The team took on Oakland's identity and Oakland took on its identity in a way that was fundamentally different than the A's or the Warriors. So 1982 comes around and that move to LA ripped the heart out the Raider fans. And you turn around and what do you get. Lowlife "faithful" 49ers fans who have been faithful for a whole year and a half sticking the knife in and twisting it as hard as they can. Laughing that Oakland lost its team. Calling you losers if you still rooted for them. Local media mocking Oakland fans. Eff that, man. We could have gotten beyond the 49ers fans getting a little big headed in 1981, but that was irreconcilable differences.

As a personal aside, I will tell you the exact moment I turned on the 49ers. As I said. I started off happy for them. I had put up with an overabundance of teasing. Still happy. I was kicked in the head at a birthday party because I was wearing a Raiders shirt. Still happy. I walked into my 7th grade English class, still happy. Because I watched my sister suffer through all those years and I was happy for her and others. When my 49er fan English teacher was talking excitedly about the 49ers, someone decided to tell her that I was a Raiders fan. To be clear, not me. She, an adult in a position of power over me, proceeded to lay into me, a 12 year old, in front of the whole class asking how I could be that stupid and saying a bunch of racist shyte about Oakland fans being thugs and criminals and was I a thug and a criminal.

Walked out of that class hating all 49er scum and never looked back. Never saw that any 49ers fans gave me any cause to change my mind.

So fast forward to today. Tray Lance! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

(and by the way you have to at least appreciate that I am clearly going to have the piss taken out of me if Lance becomes a star. I promise I won't be a total wuss like Dmitri if he does and I will take my lumps. That being said, I will be absolutely insufferable when Lance breaks the paper airplane throwing record)

OaktownBear said:

---

So you grew up and the Raiders were in Los Angeles. Let me explain to something to you. The Raiders and Oakland fans had an incredibly special relationship. In those days there were bars and restaurants you could go to where people knew they could hang out with players. The team took on Oakland's identity and Oakland took on its identity in a way that was fundamentally different than the A's or the Warriors. So 1982 comes around and that move to LA ripped the heart out the Raider fans. And you turn around and what do you get. Lowlife "faithful" 49ers fans who have been faithful for a whole year and a half sticking the knife in and twisting it as hard as they can. Laughing that Oakland lost its team. Calling you losers if you still rooted for them. Local media mocking Oakland fans. Eff that, man. We could have gotten beyond the 49ers fans getting a little big headed in 1981, but that was irreconcilable differences.

---

Yeah, I would never have experienced any of that. I was 2 years old.

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

---

Oh, no. Your case ain't rested. Dodgers fans are full of it. They hate the Giants and Giants' fans. I said I don't care about the 49ers. I do still hate 49er fans. How do I explain this though. In the old days I went into every weekend really wanting the Raiders to win and really wanting the 49ers to lose. If the Raiders sucked, I still had 30 teams to root for. I hated every one of those 5 Superbowl wins with a passion. I watched avidly hoping the 49ers would lose.

Things are different now. You can win. I don't care. I did not watch your last Superbowl and I really didn't care either way. I didn't take pleasure in your loss as I would have before.

But if you are going to walk down the street and slip on a banana peel right in front of me, I'm going to point at you like Nelson and say "HA! HA!" and remember how much y'all deserve that banana peel and be glad it was sitting right in front of my face so I could see you fall.

It is much freer now. No sorrow when you win. Don't need to make any effort to follow you. Just all the schadenfreude enjoyment I can have for free. Literally, if you guys didn't insufferably post your off topic stuff on a Cal board, I wouldn't have done anything but chuckle to myself when I heard on talk radio they picked Lance. So thanks for that.

Honestly, I'm completely free to troll you all I want here, because if Lance is the next Tom Brady (HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) I won't care. One of you will bump this thread and I will say "oops. ya got me" and I'll move on.

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

---

This is pretty misleading. Longshore and Reed were both true freshmen and Levy was not considered anything other than an emergency QB. He was listed as a FB.

---

Tedford inherited Boller and Robertson

Tedford's early QB recruits:
2002 Levy
2003 Dove and Rodgers
2004 Longshore
2005 Reed and Ayoob

In 2003 Robertson lead the country in passing rating until supplanted by maybe the best QB of all time. With Rodgers and Robertson returning in 2004, Levy moved over to FB and Dove left. Longshore redshirted. With Rodgers leaving and Robertson graduating in 2005, Levy moved back to compete at QB in the Spring. Reed enrolled early. Tedford signed Ayoob that Spring too. They competed all summer. I thought Reed, our highest rated HS recruit, was best but he ended up redshirting and the starting job went to fellow Elite 11 redshirt freshman Longshore who had the benefit of a year in the system and knew the playbook well. Tedford was so confident in that decision he started reworking Ayoob's throwing mechanics.

In the opener against Sac State, Longshore looked good, but then stood in the pocket too long after a throw and got rolled up, out for the season. Ayoob came in and looked like a guy who was in the middle of having his throwing mechanics reworked.

I thought Tedford should have burned Reed's redshirt. But that was something he never did (Kline in 2012 would have been good too). We had a great team with Lynch and Jackson and Ayoob turned out to be the weak link, culminating in his getting booed by Cal fans in the USC game. Tedford finally switched to Levy and we at least won the Big Game.

So with Dove's departure, followed by Rodger's early entry and Robertson's graduation we were left with two 4 star Elite 11 QBs, one a redshirt, a Five Star JC All-American and a guy in his fourth year in the program with some previous game experience at QB.

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

---

Oh, no. Your case ain't rested. Dodgers fans are full of it. They hate the Giants and Giants' fans. I said I don't care about the 49ers. I do still hate 49er fans. How do I explain this though. In the old days I went into every weekend really wanting the Raiders to win and really wanting the 49ers to lose. If the Raiders sucked, I still had 30 teams to root for. I hated every one of those 5 Superbowl wins with a passion. I watched avidly hoping the 49ers would lose.

Things are different now. You can win. I don't care. I did not watch your last Superbowl and I really didn't care either way. I didn't take pleasure in your loss as I would have before.

But if you are going to walk down the street and slip on a banana peel right in front of me, I'm going to point at you like Nelson and say "HA! HA!" and remember how much y'all deserve that banana peel and be glad it was sitting right in front of my face so I could see you fall.

It is much freer now. No sorrow when you win. Don't need to make any effort to follow you. Just all the schadenfreude enjoyment I can have for free. Literally, if you guys didn't insufferably post your off topic stuff on a Cal board, I wouldn't have done anything but chuckle to myself when I heard on talk radio they picked Lance. So thanks for that.

Honestly, I'm completely free to troll you all I want here, because if Lance is the next Tom Brady (HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) I won't care. One of you will bump this thread and I will say "oops. ya got me" and I'll move on.

---

You have done a great job here demonstrating how much 49ers fans are jerks about their team.

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

---

Oh, no. Your case ain't rested. Dodgers fans are full of it. They hate the Giants and Giants' fans. I said I don't care about the 49ers. I do still hate 49er fans. How do I explain this though. In the old days I went into every weekend really wanting the Raiders to win and really wanting the 49ers to lose. If the Raiders sucked, I still had 30 teams to root for. I hated every one of those 5 Superbowl wins with a passion. I watched avidly hoping the 49ers would lose.

Things are different now. You can win. I don't care. I did not watch your last Superbowl and I really didn't care either way. I didn't take pleasure in your loss as I would have before.

But if you are going to walk down the street and slip on a banana peel right in front of me, I'm going to point at you like Nelson and say "HA! HA!" and remember how much y'all deserve that banana peel and be glad it was sitting right in front of my face so I could see you fall.

It is much freer now. No sorrow when you win. Don't need to make any effort to follow you. Just all the schadenfreude enjoyment I can have for free. Literally, if you guys didn't insufferably post your off topic stuff on a Cal board, I wouldn't have done anything but chuckle to myself when I heard on talk radio they picked Lance. So thanks for that.

Honestly, I'm completely free to troll you all I want here, because if Lance is the next Tom Brady (HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) I won't care. One of you will bump this thread and I will say "oops. ya got me" and I'll move on.

---

You have done a great job here demonstrating how much 49ers fans are jerks about their team.

---

1. I don't care what a bunch of 49ers fans think of me.
2. I don't care if 329,999,999 Americans think 49ers fans are wonderful and I am a jerk. I know the truth and that is all that matters.
3. Oh, I'm absolutely being a jerk. And loooooooooving it.

Because at base, here is the thing. The truth is obvious. Your ownership sucks and deep down you know it. This was a stupid trade and deep down you know it. Lynch can't draft and deep down you know it. Lance is a huge reach and deep down you know it. Your team is fatally flawed next year in a way a better organization might have fixed and deep down you know it. They mortgaged their present to mortgage their future and deep down you know it. I am absolutely thrilled to be a jerk if it gives a microphone to that little man in your head that has been quietly pinging you with all the things I'm loudly screaming. Because at the end of the day, it isn't my opinion that hurts. Its your own.

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

---

This is pretty misleading. Longshore and Reed were both true freshmen and Levy was not considered anything other than an emergency QB. He was listed as a FB.

---

Tedford inherited Boller and Robertson

Tedford's early QB recruits:
2002 Levy
2003 Dove and Rodgers
2004 Longshore
2005 Reed and Ayoob

In 2003 Robertson lead the country in passing rating until supplanted by maybe the best QB of all time. With Rodgers and Robertson returning in 2004, Levy moved over to FB and Dove left. Longshore redshirted. With Rodgers leaving and Robertson graduating in 2005, Levy moved back to compete at QB in the Spring. Reed enrolled early. Tedford signed Ayoob that Spring too. They competed all summer. I thought Reed, our highest rated HS recruit, was best but he ended up redshirting and the starting job went to fellow Elite 11 redshirt freshman Longshore who had the benefit of a year in the system and knew the playbook well. Tedford was so confident in that decision he started reworking Ayoob's throwing mechanics.

In the opener against Sac State, Longshore looked good, but then stood in the pocket too long after a throw and got rolled up, out for the season. Ayoob came in and looked like a guy who was in the middle of having his throwing mechanics reworked.

I thought Tedford should have burned Reed's redshirt. But that was something he never did (Kline in 2012 would have been good too). We had a great team with Lynch and Jackson and Ayoob turned out to be the weak link, culminating in his getting booed by Cal fans in the USC game. Tedford finally switched to Levy and we at least won the Big Game.

So with Dove's departure, followed by Rodger's early entry and Robertson's graduation we were left with two 4 star Elite 11 QBs, one a redshirt, a Five Star JC All-American and a guy in his fourth year in the program with some previous game experience at QB.

---

Remind me how Reed did at SJSU again?

Look, Holmoe left him Boller and Robertson and nothing else. Tedford added Levy late to a class he inherited that didn't have a QB recruit. Levy was never a Pac-10 quality QB. He moved to FB. Tedford recruited Dove when he was recruiting based on a 1-10 finish. Dove was never a Pac-12 quality QB. He recruited Longshore the first year he could show positive results. Unfortunately Longshore got injured. Otherwise we would have been fine. Not as good as we wanted to be, but fine. Getting Longshore and Ayoob and Reed was about as much as you could have expected, though given the lack of depth, I would have preferred not to go with someone like Reed who had a high upside but was extremely raw.

The Truth: The Oakland Raiders (the first time around) were special. When they came back from LA, I got kind of emotional, but then they screwed everything up (on field and off). Still, I hated to see them go to Vegas. When it finally became apparent that they were going for sure, they became dead to me.

49ers: Meh. No matter what they do (although I did appreciate their goodness, when they were good). Can't like 'em; can't hate them. Their fans sort of suck, but whatever. I would never go see a game in Levis Stadium, not even a Cal game (those should be in CMS).

Big C said:

---

The Truth: The Oakland Raiders (the first time around) were special. When they came back from LA, I got kind of emotional, but then they screwed everything up (on field and off). Still, I hated to see them go to Vegas. When it finally became apparent that they were going for sure, they became dead to me.

---

Honestly, I was done with the dysfunction well before they moved to Vegas. I don't have time to root for laundry anymore. Too many wonderful things in my life, my kids, my family, to waste on a professional team that just doesn't put a good product on the field. But, I could occasionally look up a score or something and I may have continued that relationship with Vegas. But Mark Davis made it very clear with his treatment of Oakland and its fans the last year that he did not want us to follow, so I didn't. Those fans did not deserve that from him. I do like it if I look at the standings and they have done better than the 49ers, though, just because there are still a few of those circa 1981 49er fans who that still annoys and whatever annoys them is goodness.

Honestly, I said a few years before they left that Oakland isn't big enough, or rich enough, and is no longer stupid enough, to keep 3 pro teams. Someone was going to make an offer Oakland couldn't match because someone was going to be stupid enough. I thought for several years that Oakland should focus on the A's.

OaktownBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

---

This is pretty misleading. Longshore and Reed were both true freshmen and Levy was not considered anything other than an emergency QB. He was listed as a FB.

---

Tedford inherited Boller and Robertson

Tedford's early QB recruits:
2002 Levy
2003 Dove and Rodgers
2004 Longshore
2005 Reed and Ayoob

In 2003 Robertson lead the country in passing rating until supplanted by maybe the best QB of all time. With Rodgers and Robertson returning in 2004, Levy moved over to FB and Dove left. Longshore redshirted. With Rodgers leaving and Robertson graduating in 2005, Levy moved back to compete at QB in the Spring. Reed enrolled early. Tedford signed Ayoob that Spring too. They competed all summer. I thought Reed, our highest rated HS recruit, was best but he ended up redshirting and the starting job went to fellow Elite 11 redshirt freshman Longshore who had the benefit of a year in the system and knew the playbook well. Tedford was so confident in that decision he started reworking Ayoob's throwing mechanics.

In the opener against Sac State, Longshore looked good, but then stood in the pocket too long after a throw and got rolled up, out for the season. Ayoob came in and looked like a guy who was in the middle of having his throwing mechanics reworked.

I thought Tedford should have burned Reed's redshirt. But that was something he never did (Kline in 2012 would have been good too). We had a great team with Lynch and Jackson and Ayoob turned out to be the weak link, culminating in his getting booed by Cal fans in the USC game. Tedford finally switched to Levy and we at least won the Big Game.

So with Dove's departure, followed by Rodger's early entry and Robertson's graduation we were left with two 4 star Elite 11 QBs, one a redshirt, a Five Star JC All-American and a guy in his fourth year in the program with some previous game experience at QB.

---

Remind me how Reed did at SJSU again?

Look, Holmoe left him Boller and Robertson and nothing else. Tedford added Levy late to a class he inherited that didn't have a QB recruit. Levy was never a Pac-10 quality QB. He moved to FB. Tedford recruited Dove when he was recruiting based on a 1-10 finish. Dove was never a Pac-12 quality QB. He recruited Longshore the first year he could show positive results. Unfortunately Longshore got injured. Otherwise we would have been fine. Not as good as we wanted to be, but fine. Getting Longshore and Ayoob and Reed was about as much as you could have expected, though given the lack of depth, I would have preferred not to go with someone like Reed who had a high upside but was extremely raw.

---

Dove was the worst scholarship qb I've ever seen at Cal. I remember seeing him in practice routinely missing 5 yard screen passes.

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

---

Oh, no. Your case ain't rested. Dodgers fans are full of it. They hate the Giants and Giants' fans. I said I don't care about the 49ers. I do still hate 49er fans. How do I explain this though. In the old days I went into every weekend really wanting the Raiders to win and really wanting the 49ers to lose. If the Raiders sucked, I still had 30 teams to root for. I hated every one of those 5 Superbowl wins with a passion. I watched avidly hoping the 49ers would lose.

Things are different now. You can win. I don't care. I did not watch your last Superbowl and I really didn't care either way. I didn't take pleasure in your loss as I would have before.

But if you are going to walk down the street and slip on a banana peel right in front of me, I'm going to point at you like Nelson and say "HA! HA!" and remember how much y'all deserve that banana peel and be glad it was sitting right in front of my face so I could see you fall.

It is much freer now. No sorrow when you win. Don't need to make any effort to follow you. Just all the schadenfreude enjoyment I can have for free. Literally, if you guys didn't insufferably post your off topic stuff on a Cal board, I wouldn't have done anything but chuckle to myself when I heard on talk radio they picked Lance. So thanks for that.

Honestly, I'm completely free to troll you all I want here, because if Lance is the next Tom Brady (HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) I won't care. One of you will bump this thread and I will say "oops. ya got me" and I'll move on.

---

You have done a great job here demonstrating how much 49ers fans are jerks about their team.

---

1. I don't care what a bunch of 49ers fans think of me.
2. I don't care if 329,999,999 Americans think 49ers fans are wonderful and I am a jerk. I know the truth and that is all that matters.
3. Oh, I'm absolutely being a jerk. And loooooooooving it.

---

OK

So about the 49ers ownership: the Yorks suck, but when they are able to get a decent coach and get out of the way for a while the team can be good. Harbaugh got them to the Super Bowl. Now Shanahan has done it as well. So I'm not sure about "fatally flawed." Clearly they are able to do some things right, some of the time.

I'm not a fan of trading away so many picks to draft a QB, but I've been pretty clear that I simply have no idea how good Lance will or won't be. It's definitely a massive risk they took. We'll see what happens.

As a Niners fan, I got to see a lot of championships and have gotten some fun rides in recent years too. Yes, there have been dry periods in between, but again, there are lots of NFL fans who would kill for two Super Bowl appearances in the last 10 years. I enjoy my favorite teams when they do well and focus on other things when they suck. If this blows up in their faces, the team might suck for a while. Oh well. They'll be good again, at some point.

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

1 winning record in 7 years. 44-68 over that time

The Raiders, who you all rightfully think are a disaster, are 47-65 over the same time period.

The Raiders had a better record last year (Wah! Injuries! Wah!) and over the past 7

Think about that. You are nothing but the Raiders now. No one is jealous

Since Mooch left because the incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally, 4 winning records in 18 years. 3 of which were under Harbaugh who left because the next incompetent owner had a temper tantrum and decided he couldn't stand him personally.

126-161 over those 18 years. No one is jealous.


Eddie Debartolo was an amazing owner. It took him 4 years to get it going and then they went on a fabulous run for 18 years of their 72 year history. All 49er fans should look back on that era with tremendous fondness. That ended 23 years ago and the 49ers management has been dysfunction since including building one of the worst professional sports stadiums to scar the landscape in the past 40 years. No one is jealous now. Outside of those 18 years with Eddie D, the 49ers have 0 championships in 54 tries. They have a grand total of 7 division titles.

No one under 30 remembers the last time the 49ers won a Superbowl 27 years ago.

Think about this. Al Davis died 10 years ago. At that point, it was 27 years after the Raiders had won their last Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls in 10 years. That capped an 18 year period for the Raiders that was the Raiders heyday much like the Debartolo 18 year period was the 49ers heyday. The Raiders won 12 division titles in that period. One of the other years they won the Superbowl. They won 3 Superbowls and went to a 4th. They won an AFL championship before the leagues were combined.

Remember when Al Davis died? Was anybody jealous of the Raiders?

But Harbaugh, you say? Well, turn back the clock 10 years to when Davis died. At almost the same point in the Raiders timeline as the 49ers are now, the Raiders won 3 straight division titles and went to a Superbowl. Better than Harbaugh. Was anyone jealous of the Raiders when Al Davis died?

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

When Al Davis died 10 years ago the Raiders had a .549 historical record. The 49ers have a .531 historical record.

I repeat You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

How many years before Al Davis died were people mocking his talk about "The greatness of the Raiduhs" and you are going to sit here and think anyone is jealous about "The greatness of the Ninuhs".

I repeat, you are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

JaMarcuss Russell's stats his last year: 232-342, 67.8%, 3129 yards, 28 TDs 8 INT, against the SEC.

Trey Lance stats last year 192-287, 66.9%, 2786 yards, 28 TD's 0 INT against FCS.
Russell was rated higher his year by most scouts than Lance is this year. The Raiders spent a #1 pick on him. The 49ers spent a #3, 2 future first rounds and a 4th Round for Lance.

But, but, Lance is gotta be good because Shanahan and Lynch have such a great record in the draft. I'm sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I couldn't say that with a straight face.


But Shanahan is a genius.

29-35 and 3 ten loss seasons out of 4.

I repeat. You are the Raiders now. No one is jealous.

The difference is that very few in Raider Nation besides Al still thought anyone gave a damn, unlike the "faithful".

The hilarious thing is that 49er fans have been wetting themselves in a panic that they were going to take Mac Jones and they have absolutely no clue anything about Mac Jones except that media got themselves in a tizzy about this so they decided it must be terrible, yet Lance, who 2 months ago was not remotely close to be considered as a #3 pick is a relief.

Even your fans are the Raiders. Hell, worse. No one is jealous.

THE GREATNESS....OF THE NINUHS....AND OUR COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE.....WILL LIVE ON.....FOREVUH!!!!!

---

This is a lot of typing for a guy who claims to not care about the Niners. You sound like the Dodger fans who talk crap about the Giants up and down and then end it with, "and also I don't care about you."

---

Oh, no. I don't care about the niners. In fact, I don't care about the NFL. I do care about having fun watching Niner fans suffer. It was great fun writing that!

---

I rest my case.

---

Oh, no. Your case ain't rested. Dodgers fans are full of it. They hate the Giants and Giants' fans. I said I don't care about the 49ers. I do still hate 49er fans. How do I explain this though. In the old days I went into every weekend really wanting the Raiders to win and really wanting the 49ers to lose. If the Raiders sucked, I still had 30 teams to root for. I hated every one of those 5 Superbowl wins with a passion. I watched avidly hoping the 49ers would lose.

Things are different now. You can win. I don't care. I did not watch your last Superbowl and I really didn't care either way. I didn't take pleasure in your loss as I would have before.

But if you are going to walk down the street and slip on a banana peel right in front of me, I'm going to point at you like Nelson and say "HA! HA!" and remember how much y'all deserve that banana peel and be glad it was sitting right in front of my face so I could see you fall.

It is much freer now. No sorrow when you win. Don't need to make any effort to follow you. Just all the schadenfreude enjoyment I can have for free. Literally, if you guys didn't insufferably post your off topic stuff on a Cal board, I wouldn't have done anything but chuckle to myself when I heard on talk radio they picked Lance. So thanks for that.

Honestly, I'm completely free to troll you all I want here, because if Lance is the next Tom Brady (HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) I won't care. One of you will bump this thread and I will say "oops. ya got me" and I'll move on.

---

You have done a great job here demonstrating how much 49ers fans are jerks about their team.

---

1. I don't care what a bunch of 49ers fans think of me.
2. I don't care if 329,999,999 Americans think 49ers fans are wonderful and I am a jerk. I know the truth and that is all that matters.
3. Oh, I'm absolutely being a jerk. And loooooooooving it.

---

OK

So about the 49ers ownership: the Yorks suck, but when they are able to get a decent coach and get out of the way for a while the team can be good. Harbaugh got them to the Super Bowl. Now Shanahan has done it as well. So I'm not sure about "fatally flawed." Clearly they are able to do some things right, some of the time.

I'm not a fan of trading away so many picks to draft a QB, but I've been pretty clear that I simply have no idea how good Lance will or won't be. It's definitely a massive risk they took. We'll see what happens.

As a Niners fan, I got to see a lot of championships and have gotten some fun rides in recent years too. Yes, there have been dry periods in between, but again, there are lots of NFL fans who would kill for two Super Bowl appearances in the last 10 years. I enjoy my favorite teams when they do well and focus on other things when they suck. If this blows up in their faces, the team might suck for a while. Oh well. They'll be good again, at some point.

---

Oh, yeah! Well...ah geez there isn't much I can say to this. You finally stopped feeding the troll. Ah well. Have a nice weekend! They won't be as nice come football season. Yes! Got one last one in!

OaktownBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

That's not really a great comparison though since Montana put up decent but not worldbreaking numbers at Notre Dame and Brady wasn't even a full-time starter at Michigan plus neither went in round 1.

Mac Jones is a rich man's AJ McCarron, there are really productive and successful college QBs who have maxed out their potential and don't translate to the next level just like there are HS QBs with gaudy stats who don't have what it takes to play P5 football; it's all about projecting to the next level.

It's almost impossible to project a 'next Josh Allen' just like it was almost impossible to predict the first Josh Allen (I sure as hell didn't) but I think Trey Lance has a great shot. I know I could easily be wrong but I had Herbert 1a/1b of last year's QB class with Burrow (even though I hate nikeU) and I had Lance to the Niners too; I'm feeling pretty good about myself right now so feel free to trash my opinions, and I could easily still be wrong about both, but remember that this is one of the few bright spots for me the past so maybe take it a little easy on me if you think I'm wrong and/or if I end up actually being wrong

---

I wouldn't have taken any of the three in the first round. I know when a QB has zero relevant experience and everyone drools over physical measurables, run. I don't know why everyone compares him to Josh Allen. Allen's experience and competition level were way ahead of Lance's. On top of that, Lance plays for the Alabama of FCS, throwing to guys who are way better than their opponents. A better comp for Lance is Joe Ayoob. And dude is going to get one year to watch and then ready or not, he is starting. Hope that he can handle the massive ripping he's going to get from the faithful when he is not ready and they are staring at another year without a draft pick. He may succeed someday. If he does it will be for team number two whose fans won't mind the bargain basement price they will pay, vs. week after week of "we spent 3 first round picks on this?".

I'm not enamored of Jones because he has too much talent around him to judge what he will do with a level playing field, but the key attributes of a long term successful Qb are the ability to run an offense, read a defense, and throw accurately. I think who took Jones should tell you something. Wouldn't have taken any of the three, but between the three I disagree with conventional wisdom and would take Jones. And I would point out the 49ers could have Jones plus two first round picks to help him in the next couple years.

Will be interesting to see what GB gets for Rodgers and whether the 49ers took themselves out of the running by giving away all their picks.

---

Don't you think Lance has much more leadership and intelligence than Ayoob? Ayoob seemed to collapse under the pressure of D1 ball. Lance seems ready to handle just about anything. The 49ers assessed that. It seems you are making physical talent comparisons. But clearly Ayoob had mental issues that affected his ability to make the transition. I think SF carefully assessed Lance with regard to those things and found quite the opposite. The mental side makes a big difference in who translates well to the next level.

I don't know that Tedford had the luxury that SF had to decide how they were going to attack the QB situation. Cal had to fill a void left by Rogers. SF didn't really have a void and can afford to let Lance sit. Ayoob was forced to play pretty much right away.

I agree that SF should not have reached for Lance. But I don't think he is going to be a bust. He may take a bit to be ready for prime time. But so did Brady. Montana was a back up for over a year. Mahomes sat a year. Rogers sat 3 years.

I get it that as a Raiders fan you feel you have to hate on SF. Guess what, I grew up a Raiders, 49ers, Giants and A's fan. So I don't really get it. I think a lot of it is jealousy. The 49ers better represent a commitment to excellence than the Raiders do at this point. And that has been the case for the better part of this century. And the Leatherwood pick is pretty laughable when Darrisaw and a ton of other highly ranked OTs were still on the board. Leatherwood was rated as a 2nd or 3rd rounder in most drafts. At least Lance was commonly rated as a top 10 pick. Even if the Raiders really valued Leatherwood as an organization, they must have known that he would be there in round #2 (pick #48). That is how dumb they are.

I hate what has happened to the Raiders over the years. But the fact is is that the organizational incompetence with the Raiders is way beyond whatever incompetence went on with this 49er trade for #3. I would love for the Raiders to be better than the 49ers, because they are my first love as a bay area sports fan. But it's not going to happen until the Davis family sells the team. Don't hold your breath. In the meantime I don't feel that the 49ers are the reason why the Raiders are what they are. And I don't feel there has to be a zero sum reality with them.

---

After Rodgers declared and Robertson graduated Cal still had 4 QBs for 2005: Longshore, Reed, Ayoob and Levy. Longshore got injured in the opener, so then Tedford went with Ayoob and eventually Levy. From watching the guys throw in practice I wanted Tedford to burn Reed's redshirt. He had far and away the strongest arm and that is what that team needed someone to hand off to Marshawn or throw deep to Desean.

---

This is pretty misleading. Longshore and Reed were both true freshmen and Levy was not considered anything other than an emergency QB. He was listed as a FB.

---

Tedford inherited Boller and Robertson

Tedford's early QB recruits:
2002 Levy
2003 Dove and Rodgers
2004 Longshore
2005 Reed and Ayoob

In 2003 Robertson lead the country in passing rating until supplanted by maybe the best QB of all time. With Rodgers and Robertson returning in 2004, Levy moved over to FB and Dove left. Longshore redshirted. With Rodgers leaving and Robertson graduating in 2005, Levy moved back to compete at QB in the Spring. Reed enrolled early. Tedford signed Ayoob that Spring too. They competed all summer. I thought Reed, our highest rated HS recruit, was best but he ended up redshirting and the starting job went to fellow Elite 11 redshirt freshman Longshore who had the benefit of a year in the system and knew the playbook well. Tedford was so confident in that decision he started reworking Ayoob's throwing mechanics.

In the opener against Sac State, Longshore looked good, but then stood in the pocket too long after a throw and got rolled up, out for the season. Ayoob came in and looked like a guy who was in the middle of having his throwing mechanics reworked.

I thought Tedford should have burned Reed's redshirt. But that was something he never did (Kline in 2012 would have been good too). We had a great team with Lynch and Jackson and Ayoob turned out to be the weak link, culminating in his getting booed by Cal fans in the USC game. Tedford finally switched to Levy and we at least won the Big Game.

So with Dove's departure, followed by Rodger's early entry and Robertson's graduation we were left with two 4 star Elite 11 QBs, one a redshirt, a Five Star JC All-American and a guy in his fourth year in the program with some previous game experience at QB.

---

Remind me how Reed did at SJSU again?

Look, Holmoe left him Boller and Robertson and nothing else. Tedford added Levy late to a class he inherited that didn't have a QB recruit. Levy was never a Pac-10 quality QB. He moved to FB. Tedford recruited Dove when he was recruiting based on a 1-10 finish. Dove was never a Pac-12 quality QB. He recruited Longshore the first year he could show positive results. Unfortunately Longshore got injured. Otherwise we would have been fine. Not as good as we wanted to be, but fine. Getting Longshore and Ayoob and Reed was about as much as you could have expected, though given the lack of depth, I would have preferred not to go with someone like Reed who had a high upside but was extremely raw.

---

Set SJSU records, at one point lead the nation in completion percentage, beat Stanford....
https://sjsuspartans.com/news/2010/6/4/A_Graduation_Story_Cheers_For_Kyle_Reed

Some insight into the process.

The reaction of #49ers GM @JohnLynch49ers was priceless Monday when coach Kyle Shanahan informed him that @treylance09 was his QB choice for this year’s draft. The story. https://t.co/dr54d2n8ho

— Jim Trotter (@JimTrotter_NFL) May 1, 2021

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

6. Jealous of the 49ers? What the hell do they have for ANYONE to be jealous of?

---

Come on, they are clearly one of the most successful NFL franchises historically (5 Super Bowl wins). They went to the Super Bowl the season before last. Plenty of fanbases would love to have that kind of record.

---

It used to be that the Raiders were a big part of marketing for the NFL. Now I'd say that that is true of the 49ers. They sell the NFL better than most teams. If you are going to have a primetime game on your network your better off with

• 49ers
• GB
• Dallas
• Pittsburgh
• LA Rams
• NE
• NO
• Seattle
• KC
• TB --currently

Of course there are non team-specific factors that are important like matchups, rivalries, whose winning at the time and star power. But, all things being equal, the 49ers are one of 10 teams the nation wants to see (regardless of love or hate). The Raiders were 1 of 10 back in the day. Now they are one of the last teams you want to see.

Back in the day (when the Raiders were winning SBs), the Raiders were the face of the NFL along with:

• Cowboys
• Vikings
• Denver
• Rams
• Miami
• Pittsburgh
• Houston (Oilers)
• San Diego
• Philadelphia

From an ownership standpoint there also has been a big flip. Al Davis from the 50s-80s was a big reason why the Raiders could be referred to as the winningest team in football. From the 80s on, Davis' age and declining health, including mental health, was reflected in the team's steady decline. In the meantime, SF thrived under the spend happy Debartolo regime.

In the 90s both teams had periods decline and success. The 49ers struggled to maintain the same standard after Eddie was forced to hand ownership over to his sister and brother in law. The York regime made a lot of mistakes and still struggles to get back to the level under Eddie. In the meantime, Al Davis' son, Mark has had equal struggles. The difference is that, over the last 2 decades, the York's seem to be able to learn from their mistakes, eventually. For example, they finally have put in place a well respected and classy administration that is developing a culture where relationships matter. Mark Davis, on the other, does not seem to learn much from his mistakes, although I think his move to LV may end up being a smart one.

Over the coming years, I have a lot more faith that the 49ers will continue to improve as an organization, whereas I don't see any chance of that happening with the Raiders under Mark Davis.

BTW, as much as the 49ers gave up to get Lance, it will never be any where near the over-reach the Raiders made to get Gruden. I don't know how much the Raiders have payed Gruden for each of his wins, but it has to be close to a million dollars.

---

You can say what you think is true based on truthiness and gut feel or you can actually look up data. Ratings by team:

Average 2020 NFL National TV Ratings By Team
Dallas Cowboys 19.3m
New Orleans Saints 18.3m
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 18.3m
Seattle Seahawks 17.5m
Las Vegas Raiders 17.1m
Pittsburgh Steelers 16.8m
New England Patriots 16.2m
Kansas City Chiefs 16m
San Francisco 49ers 16m
Green Bay Packers 15.5m
Baltimore Ravens 14.9m
Chicago Bears 14.9m
Los Angeles Chargers 14.8m
Philadelphia Eagles 14m
Los Angeles Rams 14m
Buffalo Bills 13.9m
New York Giants 13.9m
Minnesota Vikings 13.3m
Arizona Cardinals 12.8m
Indianapolis Colts 12.2m
Carolina Panthers 11.7m
Atlanta Falcons 10.2m
Tennessee Titans 10.2m
New York Jets 7.6m
Denver Broncos 6.6m
Miami Dolphins 5.4m
Jacksonville Jaguars 5.4m

The 49er ownership has been a disaster since Debartolo left.
Mark Davis is a disaster of an owner. And he got someone else to build a stadium for him that is a million times better than the one York paid for.

As for success, that is easy to measure because what you and I think doesn't make a bit of difference. Luckily they play these things out on Sundays. Since Jed drove Harbaugh off, the 49ers are 36-60 (.375) and the Raiders are 44-52 (.458). The Raiders have had a better record 3 of the 6 years. The 49ers 1. They had the same record 2 years. The Raiders topped out at 12-4. The 49ers 13-3. By wins and losses, the Raiders have done quite a bit better, but I'll give you that the one year the 49ers didn't suck, they went to the Superbowl.

Your comment about the reach on Gruden is just silly. Yes, they absolutely paid too much for Gruden. I wouldn't have done it. But what you pay a coach has almost no impact on how competitive you can be. The Raiders' ownership has to pay $6.5M more per year for a coach than the 49ers. No question that is much better value for the 49ers. But, so what? I guarantee you any team would easily pay much much more cash for the draft picks the 49ers gave up for Lance if they were to become available for cash, which no team would do because they are worth more than cash. There is no way Gruden's salary is a bigger reach than a #3, 2 first round picks, and a fourth round pick, for Lance. Not even close.

Let me explain something. The 49ers and their fans all think they are competitive for the Superbowl next year because they think injuries took them out of it this year. Okay. So wouldn't your goal be to MAKE THIS YEAR'S TEAM BETTER? You have a good, not great, but good QB. Wouldn't you want to shore up the holes you have right now and make a run? Like, for instance, in a draft that is heavy with talented DB's, one of your weakest areas, MAYBE SPEND YOUR #12 ON A DB WHO CAN COME IN AND HELP RIGHT NOW?!?!?! Instead you pick a guy who cannot help you this year. And you give up a pick that could help you next year. And you give up a pick that could help you the year after that. They have significantly wounded their chance to make a run in the next two years for a guy who is a complete dice roll. Further, they are completely overreacting to Jimmy G's injury. Injuries happen to everyone. This is not a trend. He started over 3 and a half years in college without getting injured. He is a proven commodity.

I'll make this prediction. Jimmy G. will have a better season in 2022 than any of the QB's available to the 49ers at 3 (or Jets at 2). Which means they were stupid to not just keep him and pick a corner at 12. Mac Jones will have a better season in 2022 than Lance. Which means they were stupid if they did not want to pick a corner, not just to keep the number 12, pick Jones, and build around him with the two picks they would still have.

---

I agree with a lot of what you said about the 49ers draft this season. It's been an absolute disaster. I don't know how you pick Banks in round #2 and give up a great deal for Serman in round #3. There was so much first round talent available in positions of need (CB, OT, WR) in both cases.

There are only 2 things that can possibly justify what SF did:

• They are planning to run the ball exclusively.
• They have extremely high standards regarding intangibles and these 2 guys were a couple of the few that matches those standards.

I do think that Lynch is trying to build a family atmosphere, and I respect that. Despite what you say about the comparison between the 2 teams statistically, the culture is completely different. Players want to play in SF again for a reason. Guys come and go out of LV all of the time. They rarely keep their best players for any length of time (3 years or more), Carr being the notable exception. It's so ironic because Carr is the guy they should have let go of years ago. Statistically there may be some similarities but the trajectory of these 2 clubs is completely different.

There is one thing both have in common and continue to have in common: The way they draft makes no sense to anyone. In the meantime their competitors (Arizona, Denver etc.) have significantly strengthened themselves.

Looking at this draft, the 2021 NFL season is going to be interesting. I think there is going to be more parody. And there will be very few bottom dwellers (maybe Houston and Detroit). Everyone else has a chance to be a playoff team and that includes NYJ, NYG, Atlanta, Carolina, Denver, Jacksonville & Cinci.