Raiderstation

Raider_Dave wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 12:13 pm The counter argument would be... They are this close to the #1 or #2 pick. They don't need a QB, but the trade value of those top picks has to be appealing to them.
The entire tank talk is silly though. Fans want to tank. No player wants to tank. Practically all of them are super competitive and are going to try to win the game.
Front offices may want to tank. Shutting down players is a way to tank. Our front office may be trying to tank, but the players will play to win, no matter who we suit up.

Dr Death wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 9:45 am I'm not sure the Raiders are any better in that respect.

haji81872 wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:03 pm Have to draft a QB to kill them, although we are certainly quite capable.

raidersince63 wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 4:51 pm Artificial Intelligence...Models...projections. Hey, why not just play a video game to gauge reality?


Again...SMH.

Hellbound wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 4:42 pm The same Sanders who barely completed 50% of his passes and led his team to 270 total yds. he had way less to do with that victory than the defense did leading with 10 sacks & Judkins getting 2 tds

This debate is ages old but there's simply no way am college team is going to beat an NFL team

Corleone wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 4:44 pm I did, and AI said our cornerbacks were Nate Hobbs and Jack Jones. The other day I asked AI how Mendoza would stack up to recent QB's drafted in the first round and it claimed Mendoza was a 4th round prospect.

AI is inconsistent when it comes to sports info.

Willmark wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:30 pm We're sorry you don't understand technology and predictive analysis.

Willmark wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:47 pm I simply ran a Monte Carlo simulation of the 2001 Miami Hurricanes roster vs the 2025 Raiders. Each time its roughly the same and even going with college rules the Raiders are still winning 85% of the time.

As far as inconsistent for sports? I noticed it too but before I do any queries I force it to confirm valid, current data for the year in question then have it repeat it back before I proceed with the analysis.

BoKnows81 wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:52 pm fck A.I. This Raiders team is terrible and wouldnt bet on them against the best college team no matter what the spread was.

raidersince63 wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:51 pm lol...Exactly who is "we"?
I understand technology, but what I don't understand is people who try to use predictive analysis as an end all or a substitute for factual events. If it were so compelling as you seem to believe it is, why not use it to bet on games every weekend or maybe the winning lottery numbers? That way, you could be comfortably retired with a harem of your own, instead of banging away on a keyboard on a message board.

Corleone wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 5:55 pm That same Monte Carlo simulation model had the Raiders over/under on wins at 7.5.

raidersince63 wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 10:35 am But I have to wonder just how much of Fernando's success is based on his raw talent alone, and how much is a biproduct of his Coach and team mates. (I know it's a combination) Either way, even if the Raiders weren't "tanking", I don't believe they could beat Indiana. The Hooziers may or may not win it all but in my mind they are the most well balanced team I've watch this year.