Brock Bowers to IR

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
JRaider17
Posts: 12,790
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:19 pm
Location: New Jersey
Has given High Fives: 7 times
Received High Fives: 297 times

Brock Bowers to IR

Unread post by JRaider17 »

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 1,549
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:39 pm
Has given High Fives: 577 times
Received High Fives: 645 times

Unread post by Viper »

Attyla wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 11:19 am So, assuming the tank is on, and again, I know it has been done before, especially in the NBA, who is involved in the tank? Ownership, you almost have to know that if it is being done it is with Davis's knowledge. GM? That is a given. Coaches? You don't do a tank without your head coach in your pocket. Frankly, the only one on that list that would not be in the know would be Davis simply because plausible deniability is in play.

Thoughts, if there is a tank, who is in on the job?
No doubt in my mind this decision was made whether Pete agreed with it or not. Literally everyone in the world knows we need a Qb, except maybe Pete. Actually are all wondering why we haven’t addressed it in years.
Personally, I don’t know who made the decision but I say give that man a raise.
These users gave a High Five to the author Viper for the post:
Dr Death
User avatar
DeathStar24
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2023 2:11 pm
Location: PA
Has given High Fives: 30 times
Received High Fives: 151 times

Unread post by DeathStar24 »

Attyla wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 11:19 am So, assuming the tank is on, and again, I know it has been done before, especially in the NBA, who is involved in the tank? Ownership, you almost have to know that if it is being done it is with Davis's knowledge. GM? That is a given. Coaches? You don't do a tank without your head coach in your pocket. Frankly, the only one on that list that would not be in the know would be Davis simply because plausible deniability is in play.

Thoughts, if there is a tank, who is in on the job?
Personally it doesn't matter to me. And if I'm being completly honest, I'd be more curious on who thinks winning is doing them any favors at this point in the season?

Now don't get it twisted. I'm not suggesting the Raiders take a knee every offensive snap but really, 2-15 or 4-13? What's it matter?
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 »

Attyla wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 11:19 am So, assuming the tank is on, and again, I know it has been done before, especially in the NBA, who is involved in the tank? Ownership, you almost have to know that if it is being done it is with Davis's knowledge. GM? That is a given. Coaches? You don't do a tank without your head coach in your pocket. Frankly, the only one on that list that would not be in the know would be Davis simply because plausible deniability is in play.

Thoughts, if there is a tank, who is in on the job?
Hopefully Spy and possibly Brady. This wasn't Pete's decision. He's too egotistical and arrogant. Plus, I think Spy and Brady know Pete is likely gone next year, whether on his own merit or their decision. I just hope Jeanty is next. He's the one that really needs to rest.

I'm glad though. This tells me they are going to do everything possible to draft Mendoza.
These users gave a High Five to the author BoKnows81 for the post:
Dr Death
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 »

See, I don't see a world where Pete would not be in on it. If your players are being IR'd that is not enough. You need a coach willing to toss a few plays in there at critical times to make this work. Bowers being out is significant but it would not guarantee the losses. Chinn was good for us but not other world like.

I will just say that if we come out guns blazing and beat the Giants or the Chiefs or both, that the tank is not on. You could say they are protecting their assets but it would not be a tank unless we actually lose. If we lose both games then a case can be made. But that does require Pete or maybe someone else. Maybe they go to Olsen and tell him the OC job is his if he calls a shit game or they tell Graham he gets a new deal if his D goes south, but someone who is actually involved in the actual game would have to be in on it. And to be in on it, it has to be worth your while too. Because the risks are real in this thing if it is happening.

But I agree that Pete would never do such a thing.
User avatar
Viper
Posts: 1,549
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:39 pm
Has given High Fives: 577 times
Received High Fives: 645 times

Unread post by Viper »

Attyla wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 11:42 am See, I don't see a world where Pete would not be in on it. If your players are being IR'd that is not enough. You need a coach willing to toss a few plays in there at critical times to make this work. Bowers being out is significant but it would not guarantee the losses. Chinn was good for us but not other world like.

I will just say that if we come out guns blazing and beat the Giants or the Chiefs or both, that the tank is not on. You could say they are protecting their assets but it would not be a tank unless we actually lose. If we lose both games then a case can be made. But that does require Pete or maybe someone else. Maybe they go to Olsen and tell him the OC job is his if he calls a shit game or they tell Graham he gets a new deal if his D goes south, but someone who is actually involved in the actual game would have to be in on it. And to be in on it, it has to be worth your while too. Because the risks are real in this thing if it is happening.

But I agree that Pete would never do such a thing.
Not really. If you take away key players, although admittedly we have few, does that not then take away talent on any given play?
Our starters at most positions are borderline getting playing time on other teams. Our backups are mostly incompetent at best.
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 »

Viper wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 11:47 am Not really. If you take away key players, although admittedly we have few, does that not then take away talent on any given play?
Our starters at most positions are borderline getting playing time on other teams. Our backups are mostly incompetent at best.
Then they did not do enough. Jeanty being out there helps us a ton, Mayer out there is still a threat. Geno out there, that matters because he had a good game last week against a good defense. Crosby out there matters.

If you are doing a tank just subtracting players, there is no way in hell we just remove Chinn and Bowers and a couple throw in guys. You would have to empty out at the very least Geno and Jeanty, and you probably have to take out Crosby.

If that is the version of the "tank" I don't see a tank just with the moves we did unless someone who affects the play on the field is also tied in.
User avatar
LayneStaley
Posts: 4,310
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
Has given High Fives: 464 times
Received High Fives: 1033 times

Unread post by LayneStaley »

This is gonna be one ugly game.

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 »

Here's to the Raiders "out-sorrying" the Giants and Chiefs !!!
.
.
.
Leopard_2_A7.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Viper
Posts: 1,549
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:39 pm
Has given High Fives: 577 times
Received High Fives: 645 times

Unread post by Viper »

Attyla wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 12:10 pm Then they did not do enough. Jeanty being out there helps us a ton, Mayer out there is still a threat. Geno out there, that matters because he had a good game last week against a good defense. Crosby out there matters.

If you are doing a tank just subtracting players, there is no way in hell we just remove Chinn and Bowers and a couple throw in guys. You would have to empty out at the very least Geno and Jeanty, and you probably have to take out Crosby.

If that is the version of the "tank" I don't see a tank just with the moves we did unless someone who affects the play on the field is also tied in.
Can’t sit everyone, but I can see your point. I mean, if we sat literally every starter that makes a difference, the league is coming to take the pick you’re hoping to get your Qb with.
User avatar
mranquales
Posts: 8,105
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 1:47 pm
Has given High Fives: 713 times
Received High Fives: 253 times

Unread post by mranquales »

Crosby has technically been playing hurt anyway. Even though I don't think he impacts the game as much as fans like to think, no one would question sitting him as he's been listed as "limited" for several weeks.

Jeanty is a rookie so he will play. Geno Smith is garbage so him playing doesn't hurt us.
User avatar
mranquales
Posts: 8,105
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 1:47 pm
Has given High Fives: 713 times
Received High Fives: 253 times

Unread post by mranquales »

Opoponax50 wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 9:16 am He came back too soon to begin with. That's on both him and the coaching staff. He's a super competitive dude and likely told the staff he was fine.
:rofl: It's the opposite. He expressed in the media his frustration that he was forced to play.
User avatar
LayneStaley
Posts: 4,310
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
Has given High Fives: 464 times
Received High Fives: 1033 times

Unread post by LayneStaley »

I’m worried about the chiefs. I don’t see us losing that one.

User avatar
Viper
Posts: 1,549
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:39 pm
Has given High Fives: 577 times
Received High Fives: 645 times

Unread post by Viper »

mranquales wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 1:12 pm Crosby has technically been playing hurt anyway. Even though I don't think he impacts the game as much as fans like to think, no one would question sitting him as he's been listed as "limited" for several weeks.

Jeanty is a rookie so he will play. Geno Smith is garbage so him playing doesn't hurt us.
Don’t kid yourself, Maxx impacts the game plenty. Imagine if he had some help on that line, he’s constantly double teamed or chipped.
He manages to make more than his share of impact plays. There’s a reason teams are calling every year trying to pry him away.
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 »

BoKnows81 wrote: Wed Dec 24, 2025 9:22 am What are we even talking about here? Sure, Brock wasnt healthy for a stretch but his first game back after missing those few fames he had 12 catches and 3 TDs. Dude was as close to 100% as you can get after missing those games. If you believe this current I.R. placement was purely due to him "not being healthy", you are just naive. Jeanty should be next, esp with how many touches he got in college.
This is a great move..... maybe the best this year! Now... Jeanty needs to pull a hammy in practice.
These users gave a High Five to the author Dr Death for the post:
BoKnows81
User avatar
Toast
Posts: 2,707
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 4:59 pm
Has given High Fives: 554 times
Received High Fives: 1004 times

Unread post by Toast »

Everyone works the system why not give the other TE's some looks? Is it any different than when teams pull their players prior to the playoffs to rest them?

Bowers is one of our building blocks, an elite All Pro TE is hard to come by.
These users gave a High Five to the author Toast for the post:
Dr Death
Post Reply