Raiderstation

vtraider wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2026 7:04 pm No they aren't. Both things contribute. Is one a more major contributer than the other? Yes. But both contribute therefore are not polar opposites

raidersince63 wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 2:32 am Sigh...Again, no. It was a very simple question. I clearly asked "What is more likely?".

And you just admitted there was a difference...you're free to pick one, but if you don't want to, well don't.

Viper wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 3:05 am They are both contributing factors, not sure which was more likely, tho.

2 things can definitely be true at once and, especially in this instance. Giving more weight to one factor over another doesn’t negate this and it’s ok to put them together to come to a conclusion.

It’s obvious Thornton has issues and is a work in progress while also acknowledging our coaching staff was abysmal. Best we can hope for is the player takes a step forward to give our offense a much needed shot in the arm while our coaching staff helps put wins in the column by putting said player(s) in a position to succeed.

What the heck do I know? Some people do daily walking, yoga, stretching…seems most days I’ve taken a different route by doing daily cognitive surrender. Amazing I’ve lived as long as I have.

raidersince63 wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 4:00 am Yeah, not sure why this was made into something it's not. It was a simple question.

Is it "more likely" that last year's Raiders terrible showing because of Thornton, OR was Thornton's showing last year because of the Raiders?

As bad as the Raiders were last year from top to bottom, I cannot fathom how anyone would lay blame squarely on Thornton but it should be reasonable to believe that Thornton's season last year could be partly attributed to poor coaching, play calling, QBing, etc.

But I gotta ask, what is "daily cognitive surrender", and how do you personally apply it?

Attyla wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 4:27 am I would normally not chime in on a debate such as this, but I will say in this case, while the wording of the original question was a bit odd, that Thornton's production could be due to his talent, or lack thereof, and the coaching at the same time. I am not sure how we could ever say that a guy who was on the field for 40% of the total offensive plays could ever be THE reason for the results, but you could make a case that getting 8 starts with a total of 10 catches is way underwhelming. Not seeing the end zone would also indicate that both ability and coaching were a factor.

That said, the NFL attributes wins and losses to only the coach and the QB for a reason. They are the most direct contributors to the results.

Is the book on Thornton complete? I do not think so, but at this point I would say that a smart coaching staff is going to be keeping their eyes out during cuts with a focus on offensive linemen and wideouts.

Viper wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 4:32 am I would think a smart coaching staff would be keeping their eyes out for any potential upgrade at any position during any time they are employed by a franchise.

Attyla wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 5:12 am It was odd in that the question attributed the results to a guy who was on the field 40% of the offensive snaps.

As for the revamped question? I actually think it is a foolish debate. A receiver will never be the reason for the results. They have no control over who the QB will throw to, even if they are getting open. And a receivers numbers will never be caused by a team record. Neither is more likely. The actual answer is far more complex. Coaching and talent are the primary reasons for a receivers numbers but the talent under center is the deciding factor. Calvin Johnson was balls to the walls the season they went 4-12 with a record setting 1964 yards. If the receiver decided a record, that team should have gone 16-0, won the super bowl, won the world series and hoisted Lord Stanley's cup. And yet, Johnson's record setting season attained one more win that the 10 catch Thornton.

RI RAIDER wrote: Thu Jun 04, 2026 5:21 am I do not know enough about this Thornton other than the fact that his size/speed is off the charts (you obviously can not teach that). We can only hope that he pans out (although he may be gone after this year). I found it odd that Papa Brandon hated young players (and some vets for that matter), but did give this kid an opportunity (either though he was not ready). I would not be surprised if he was Brandon's pick and he wanted to prove that he was the smartest person in the room.