SI has no love for the Nation - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board

Dantalion64 · #1 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:27 AM

SI's Projected Standings

3-13? Give me a break. And they have the Chefs at 5-11. AND the Eagles going to the Super Bowl.

**HitStick** · #2 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:36 AM

Again, the Raiders have the worst win\loss record in AAAAALLLLLL of football over the past 5 seasons. That's not a lack of "Love", that's a projection based on the team's tendnancy.

**Snake012** · #3 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:39 AM

Who predicted the Giants to win the SuperBowl at the start of the season, its an opinion, and some people might look at the Raiders record the last 5 years, see a disgruntled Head Coach, no passing game to speak of, a Run D that has been bad for 5 years with no additions in the front 7 and say this might be a recipe for disaster.

My prediction is 7-9 and second in the division. With the Colts winning over the Seahawks in the SuperBowl.

RaiderOfTheSith · #4 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:39 AM

hey we get a #2 pick next year according to them. Make it the best LT.

**Sonic Raider** · #5 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:41 AM

I wouldn't say that the predictions came on behalf of Sports Illustrated as a WHOLE even though they are in Sports Illustrated. Paul "Dr. Z" Zimmerman made those predictions himself & he's a Sports Illustrated senior writer.

As for him picking us to be 3-13. We've been among the worst teams in football for five years in a row, what do you expect guys like him to say, that we are a legit Super Bowl contender? And to be honest, things really haven't been going the way we planned with the injuries we have had lately & injuries hurt teams, period.

**R8RFOX** · #6 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:43 AM

It will be more like 8-8 or 9-7. I can't wait to prove those deuches wrong...

signal · #7 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:48 AM

Not going to comment on the prediction itself, but the Raiders are entering the 2008 season ill prepared to deal with any injuries. There lack of depth could cripple their chances to succeed this upcoming season.

That said, do you want to laugh. Check out any media outlet's predictions from year to year. They are not known for their accuracy. The game is played on the field and many things happen during the span of a season to affect a team's fortune. 3 -13 could happen, but so could 9 -7. My own feelings fall somewhere between the two extremes.

**POKE** · #8 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:50 AM

Here we go. Had they picked the Raiders to be 10-6 they would be considered the best magazine in the history of literature. Come on people. Like Hitstick said the last 5 years and given the fact that they have yet to be able to stop the run or finish games. And they have no serious depth, a unexperienced NFL QB, No WRs, No OL, Questionable DL. What do you expect them to say? I don't agree with 3-13 but I don't see this team winning more than 6-7 games either. And thing to do is go out and prove everybody wrong. Until then it is what it is.

**HITMAN** · #9 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dantalion64

SI's Projected Standings

3-13? Give me a break. And they have the Chefs at 5-11. AND the Eagles going to the Super Bowl.

It's an opinion nothing more, no sense in getting worked up about it.

**madstork** · #10 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:57 AM

I agree that we have the worst record in football in the past 5 years, so there's not much room to complain.

On the other hand, it sticks in my craw to see the Broncos and Chiefs thought of as being that much better when we outplayed the Broncos twice last year, beat the Chiefs in their house and should have beaten them in our house. In 3 of those 4 games we ran the ball down their throats and they couldn't do anything about it. That should count for something.

**HitStick** · #11 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R8RFOX

It will be more like 8-8 or 9-7. I can't wait to prove those deuches wrong...

Quote:

Originally Posted by POKE

Here we go. Had they picked the Raiders to be 10-6 they would be considered the best magazine in the history of literature. Come on people. Like Hitstick said the last 5 years and given the fact that they have yet to be able to stop the run or finish games. And they have no serious depth, a unexperienced NFL QB, No WRs, No OL, Questionable DL. What do you expect them to say? I don't agree with 3-13 but I don't see this team winning more than 6-7 games either. And thing to do is go out and prove everybody wrong. Until then it is what it is.

Yep-Yep!

Sadly that is where this team is now-today. Until we can prove the naysayers wrong by winning, their prediction of a sub-par season is legitimate.

HARBOR RAIDER · #12 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 04:00 AM

Lol. We just have to wait and see

**punisher** · #13 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 04:01 AM

You cant get mad about it, Hopefully it is not true and we do better.

**raiderroo** · #14 (**permalink**) 08-28-2008, 04:02 AM

Well sporting news magazine also has the Raiders at 3-13. So what big deal. What difference does ir make what any writer think? None it has absolutley zero effect on what happens on the field. But these predictions arent one time things its wide thought but many people out there.

The Raiders have been terrible for 5 years in a row now. The 2 worst areas on the team OL pass blocking and D-line well front 7 particularly run D wasnt upgraded much if at all. Plus with the lack of depth I can understand why these writers think that. Until this team proves it on the field this is what we will see.

Personally I do feel they will do better but I dont see 10-6 or even 9-7 with a wild card shot as many others do. I think we still have a few too many holes but at least we should be headed in the right direction. It really doesnt matter to me what any writer thinks.