Welcome to the Raiders Jermod McCoy

Las Vegas Raiders Discussion.
Born from RF.net ruins, resurrected as RF.com, now arriving at Raiderstation.
The #1 Las Vegas Raiders site on the web!
User avatar
Xramfan
Posts: 17,923
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 12:01 pm
Has given High Fives: 682 times
Received High Fives: 1279 times

Welcome to the Raiders Jermod McCoy

Unread post by Xramfan »

User avatar
rich72
Posts: 8,323
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:34 pm
Has given High Fives: 552 times
Received High Fives: 306 times

Unread post by rich72 »

GoodTimeCharlie wrote: Sun May 03, 2026 12:39 pm :eyes:

Thats good, may as well see what he can do on that knee while its still early in the offseason. If he needs another surgery it would be better to find out now than during the real training camp in summer.
These users gave a High Five to the author rich72 for the post:
GoodTimeCharlie
User avatar
GoodTimeCharlie
Posts: 4,584
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 6:26 pm
Location: Atop the commode
Has given High Fives: 1483 times
Received High Fives: 1350 times

Unread post by GoodTimeCharlie »

Top Orthopedic Surgeon Gives Raiders’ Fans Great Hope for McCoy Pick

Based on McCoy's participation, and looking at the situation from afar, Dr. Johnson said, “I don’t think there is anything that they are worrying about if they are going to play him now because they must have some evidence that the repair was good, the knee is stable, and there is no other arthritis, no existing torn meniscus with it. So if he has an excellent prognosis and no harm in, and he has rehabilitated well, over a year, I guess, he is probably ready to play.”

Dr. Johnson then discussed media speculation that McCoy was being held out for a second surgery. “If the Raiders doctor thought there was a potential second surgery, then I think that is not good, because they must see that there is a need for one. But if it is only the press speculating the need for a second surgery, with no foundation of what’s wrong, then it doesn’t make any sense.”

Offering even more details that should offer optimism for the fan base, Dr. Johnson added, “If the lesion was the size of a dime, the outlook is better. If it were the size of a quarter, the outlook is very poor. I don’t know the size of this man’s lesion; we are more than likely talking about a smaller lesion, with a very good prognosis. Then they’re going to let him play.”


https://www.si.com/nfl/raiders/onsi/las ... mccoy-pick
These users gave a High Five to the author GoodTimeCharlie for the post (total 4):
Goodtimes333, raidersince63, dred, Dr Death
User avatar
Willmark
Posts: 14,513
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 2:27 pm
Location: Keeper of THE COIN!
Has given High Fives: 904 times
Received High Fives: 861 times

Unread post by Willmark »

After everything we have been through for decades and this kid being this good and having this happen to him?

We are long overdue. I hope he lights it up.
These users gave a High Five to the author Willmark for the post (total 3):
Dr Death, Goodtimes333, Curay7680
User avatar
mstrbass2000
Posts: 866
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2026 10:49 am
Has given High Fives: 337 times
Received High Fives: 364 times

Unread post by mstrbass2000 »

Willmark wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 6:41 am After everything we have been through for decades and this kid being this good and having this happen to him?

We are long overdue. I hope he lights it up.
mccoy is very lucky to be playing a PREMIUM position, if he plays lights out for the next 3 yrs the raider r gonna pay him big time and he will make up a lot of the losses from being a 4th rd pick
User avatar
raidersince63
Posts: 1,692
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2024 6:31 am
Has given High Fives: 925 times
Received High Fives: 656 times

Unread post by raidersince63 »

GoodTimeCharlie wrote: Thu May 07, 2026 7:13 pm Top Orthopedic Surgeon Gives Raiders’ Fans Great Hope for McCoy Pick

Based on McCoy's participation, and looking at the situation from afar, Dr. Johnson said, “I don’t think there is anything that they are worrying about if they are going to play him now because they must have some evidence that the repair was good, the knee is stable, and there is no other arthritis, no existing torn meniscus with it. So if he has an excellent prognosis and no harm in, and he has rehabilitated well, over a year, I guess, he is probably ready to play.”

Dr. Johnson then discussed media speculation that McCoy was being held out for a second surgery. “If the Raiders doctor thought there was a potential second surgery, then I think that is not good, because they must see that there is a need for one. But if it is only the press speculating the need for a second surgery, with no foundation of what’s wrong, then it doesn’t make any sense.”

Offering even more details that should offer optimism for the fan base, Dr. Johnson added, “If the lesion was the size of a dime, the outlook is better. If it were the size of a quarter, the outlook is very poor. I don’t know the size of this man’s lesion; we are more than likely talking about a smaller lesion, with a very good prognosis. Then they’re going to let him play.”


https://www.si.com/nfl/raiders/onsi/las ... mccoy-pick
Thanx for sharing...very informative. And sounds like the talk of a possible second surgery was probably fostered by the media and not actual doctors. Really pulling for this kid...for me, it's hard not to.
These users gave a High Five to the author raidersince63 for the post (total 3):
KillerRaider30, Dr Death, GoodTimeCharlie
User avatar
Attyla
Posts: 51,623
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:31 pm
Has given High Fives: 1086 times
Received High Fives: 2636 times

Unread post by Attyla »

raidersince63 wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 8:40 am Thanx for sharing...very informative. And sounds like the talk of a possible second surgery was probably fostered by the media and not actual doctors. Really pulling for this kid...for me, it's hard not to.
The problem is, and rightfully so, HIPAA prevents us from knowing anything unless Jermod releases the info. The doctor even says he is somewhat guessing based on his mobility. He is a surgeon so he would know more than the average person but working in the industry I know that these guys know that they don't know unless they see the scans or actually do the work. The scans are key to being able to project how recovered he will be in the future.

That all said, the Raiders medical team is widely rated as one of the best in the league. I tend to trust that they were able to get all the data available which is why we moved up a bit to get the guy. Being in TN I got to watch a lot of his games before the injury and I like what I saw. If we got that version of him, we got a good one. We just will not know until he pads up. And yes, I am hoping he is successful.
These users gave a High Five to the author Attyla for the post:
Dr Death
User avatar
Raiders Baby
Posts: 3,091
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 8:54 am
Has given High Fives: 208 times
Received High Fives: 56 times

Unread post by Raiders Baby »

I’ll give the pissy Cheerios take.

I think the fact that we passed on him at 38, 67, 91 is evidence that we also have some serious medical questions.

Maybe we would let him drop past 38 and play chicken with everyone else until 67 or even 91, but if McCoy had a pristine medical grade in our book I don’t think we’d let him slide lower than that.

If we love McCoy the player, then we have to weigh the risk of taking him against the risk of losing out to a more aggressive team. The fact that we spent two picks (67 & 91) before taking the risk means we think there is at least SOME risk with the pick. Otherwise, the risk of losing him to another team would’ve made us act.

This is especially true at 91, because there was a very real possibility that someone else would take a top 10 graded player before or at 100. Even with that risk, we decided that we’d rather have a lower graded player with a better medical record.

I am enjoying the Koolaid (what a fool I am) and so I appreciate the positive spin here. And hey, maybe it will all work out. What a blessing that would be!

But I’m an actions >> words guy, and our actions said pretty explicitly that we also agree there is a “ticking time bomb” risk with McCoy
These users gave a High Five to the author Raiders Baby for the post:
Attyla
User avatar
Attyla
Posts: 51,623
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:31 pm
Has given High Fives: 1086 times
Received High Fives: 2636 times

Unread post by Attyla »

Raiders Baby wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 9:08 am I’ll give the pissy Cheerios take.

I think the fact that we passed on him at 38, 67, 91 is evidence that we also have some serious medical questions.

Maybe we would let him drop past 38 and play chicken with everyone else until 67 or even 91, but if McCoy had a pristine medical grade in our book I don’t think we’d let him slide lower than that.

If we love McCoy the player, then we have to weigh the risk of taking him against the risk of losing out to a more aggressive team. The fact that we spent two picks (67 & 91) before taking the risk means we think there is at least SOME risk with the pick. Otherwise, the risk of losing him to another team would’ve made us act.

This is especially true at 91, because there was a very real possibility that someone else would take a top 10 graded player before or at 100. Even with that risk, we decided that we’d rather have a lower graded player with a better medical record.

I am enjoying the Koolaid (what a fool I am) and so I appreciate the positive spin here. And hey, maybe it will all work out. What a blessing that would be!

But I’m an actions >> words guy, and our actions said pretty explicitly that we also agree there is a “ticking time bomb” risk with McCoy
I do agree that there is a measured risk to the guy. I think the risk is more about the duration of his career rather than will he play. We saw him run at his pro day, we saw him doing some things at the rookie camp. So we know the ACL is not an issue. It is that damn bone plug. And I believe the reason we did not take him earlier is that the plug is a recent surgery so we had to weigh the risk that it did not take (fairly low risk) or if additional surgery is needed (much higher risk) and that speaks to duration of his career rather than if he will ever play.
These users gave a High Five to the author Attyla for the post:
Raiders Baby
User avatar
Raiders Baby
Posts: 3,091
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 8:54 am
Has given High Fives: 208 times
Received High Fives: 56 times

Unread post by Raiders Baby »

Attyla wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 9:19 am I do agree that there is a measured risk to the guy. I think the risk is more about the duration of his career rather than will he play. We saw him run at his pro day, we saw him doing some things at the rookie camp. So we know the ACL is not an issue. It is that damn bone plug. And I believe the reason we did not take him earlier is that the plug is a recent surgery so we had to weigh the risk that it did not take (fairly low risk) or if additional surgery is needed (much higher risk) and that speaks to duration of his career rather than if he will ever play.
No doubt, ACL seems good to go, and it seems like we’re giving him a chance to get some run at camp and maybe earn a starting job.

Which is good. Pertaining to the bone plug (which seems to be the bigger Q), there were questions about whether or not it made sense to just do the 2nd surgery now because it may be more successful. The fact that we’re letting him play says to me that we think the current surgery was successful.

I think that’s the biggest take away here, and no doubt that is good news.

Bigger question is definitely the “ticking time bomb” part — how has the bone plug healed? Referring to the article, perhaps specifically about the size of the lesion at the site.

Despite my negative take, I actually LOVE the pick. Great lotto ticket selection. But unlike a traditional injury that has a set recovery timeline, it could be a situation where he is at the top of his game and all of a sudden he’s not the same player (think Gurley), or worse, can’t play at all.

I’m OK with that, but if that’s the situation then the fact that he’s playing is just a positive milestone, it’s far from a bill of clean health (as would be much more the case if we were only talking about this ACL)
User avatar
Attyla
Posts: 51,623
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:31 pm
Has given High Fives: 1086 times
Received High Fives: 2636 times

Unread post by Attyla »

Raiders Baby wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 9:49 am No doubt, ACL seems good to go, and it seems like we’re giving him a chance to get some run at camp and maybe earn a starting job.

Which is good. Pertaining to the bone plug (which seems to be the bigger Q), there were questions about whether or not it made sense to just do the 2nd surgery now because it may be more successful. The fact that we’re letting him play says to me that we think the current surgery was successful.

I think that’s the biggest take away here, and no doubt that is good news.

Bigger question is definitely the “ticking time bomb” part — how has the bone plug healed? Referring to the article, perhaps specifically about the size of the lesion at the site.

Despite my negative take, I actually LOVE the pick. Great lotto ticket selection. But unlike a traditional injury that has a set recovery timeline, it could be a situation where he is at the top of his game and all of a sudden he’s not the same player (think Gurley), or worse, can’t play at all.

I’m OK with that, but if that’s the situation then the fact that he’s playing is just a positive milestone, it’s far from a bill of clean health (as would be much more the case if we were only talking about this ACL)
Bone plugs are a 3-6 month healing process. So in theory he would be ready to go by camp, but if I am the Raiders, I am not putting him out there until the scans show 100% healed. I know the usual is to rush the guys out there as soon as possible, but not this and not him.
These users gave a High Five to the author Attyla for the post:
Vercingetorix
User avatar
RickRyb
Posts: 1,530
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2019 11:21 am
Location: SoCal
Has given High Fives: 1271 times
Received High Fives: 529 times

Unread post by RickRyb »

Seriousness of the injury aside, The Raiders may of felt pretty certain no one was touching him before the 4th round so were comfortable about passing him on their earlier picks. After selecting Stukes, The Raiders risk/needs shifted from the team's need to the need of an individual player.
These users gave a High Five to the author RickRyb for the post:
3rd and Long
User avatar
Dr Death
Posts: 3,729
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2024 10:51 am
Has given High Fives: 3767 times
Received High Fives: 890 times

Unread post by Dr Death »

If he only gives us a couple of seasons before his knee gives out, it was worth a 4th round pick. It's all up in the air at this point. We just have to wait and see how it plays out.
These users gave a High Five to the author Dr Death for the post:
raidersince63
User avatar
BoKnows81
Posts: 6,999
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:36 am
Has given High Fives: 963 times
Received High Fives: 2276 times

Unread post by BoKnows81 »

Dr Death wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 3:27 pm If he only gives us a couple of seasons before his knee gives out, it was worth a 4th round pick. It's all up in the air at this point. We just have to wait and see how it plays out.
It depends. Lot of variables. Will we be competitive during that period? If not, we'll start to look at who was drafted after, their longevity and their value to that team. I did not like the pick but I hope he proves me wrong.
User avatar
raidersince63
Posts: 1,692
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2024 6:31 am
Has given High Fives: 925 times
Received High Fives: 656 times

Unread post by raidersince63 »

Dr Death wrote: Fri May 08, 2026 3:27 pm If he only gives us a couple of seasons before his knee gives out, it was worth a 4th round pick. It's all up in the air at this point. We just have to wait and see how it plays out.
You are correct, and most everybody agrees that considering it was a 4th round pick, it was a very worthwhile pick even if it is somewhat of a gamble. But every pick is a gamble regardless of what round we're talking about. And it seems myopic that some might see the pick as terrible only because the pick did not fit their narrative and/or the pick that the pick did not jibe with the pick they personally preferred at the time.
These users gave a High Five to the author raidersince63 for the post (total 4):
RickRyb, Goodtimes333, Dr Death, skullnbonz
User avatar
FLORIDARAYDAH
Posts: 7,901
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:38 pm
Has given High Fives: 808 times
Received High Fives: 529 times

Unread post by FLORIDARAYDAH »

I don't hate the pick but Im not excited about it either. I feel best case scenario we get a few years out of him. I also feel we are a few years away from competing. It's only a 4th round pick so not a big gamble but it's not much different than signing a vet with only a few years left IMO
These users gave a High Five to the author FLORIDARAYDAH for the post:
raidersince63
Post Reply