Skip to content

Report: Raiders take a look at Mat McBriar, Jason Baker


The Raiders have “recently” had veteran punters Jason Baker and Mat McBriar in for workouts and are “seriously considering” signing a punter, ESPN’s Bill Williamson reported Thursday.

Second-year pro Marquette King and undrafted rookie Bobby Cowan are currently the Raiders’ punters.

The 33-year-old McBriar punted 55 times in 13 games for Philadelphia in 2012, posting a 46.5-yard gross average and a 36.5-yard net average. The Eagles’ special teams coordinator in 2012, Bobby April, now holds the same position in Oakland, as Williamson noted.

Baker, 35, did not punt in the NFL in 2012. He posted a 34.1-yard net average in 16 games for Carolina in 2011. According to the Fort Wayne (Ind.) News-Sentinel, an undisclosed non-football injury was one of the factors keeping Baker off the field in 2012.

On Tuesday, PFT mentioned the Raiders as a team that could seemingly be a fit for ex-Vikings punter Chris Kluwe on need alone if neither King nor Cowan panned out or if the club wanted more experience at the position.

How ever the Raiders’ proceed at punter, King could be a player to watch over the course of the summer. He has excellent leg strength.

Permalink 23 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill
23 Responses to “Report: Raiders take a look at Mat McBriar, Jason Baker”
  1. inyofaceagain says: May 9, 2013 6:28 PM

    Just HAD to drop Kluwe’s name huh?
    I feel bad for him and Tebow, the media has ruined their careers. Nobody wants the non-stop circus that is the media. Why do you think all the major media wants Tebow to go to Jacksonville? Because they all want to spend summer in Florida! Redics.

  2. r8rsfan says: May 9, 2013 6:32 PM

    Kluwe has a big mouth and isn’t afraid to use it. WAY too much drama from a punter.

  3. autumnwind999 says: May 9, 2013 6:37 PM

    Roll with King. Let him develop and don’t play games by bringing in one of these guys. If King flops you can easily sign a vet off the street.

  4. spellingcops says: May 9, 2013 6:44 PM

    Hope he’s good. God knows he’ll be on the field plenty…

  5. boknowsvt says: May 9, 2013 6:50 PM

    Agree with autumnwind, roll with King and let him develop. Nobody’s expecting much this year anyway. The kid has an absolute cannon attached to his hip. He and SeaBass need to work on their chemistry when it comes to the hold on extra points/field goals.

  6. thebumontelegraphave says: May 9, 2013 7:09 PM

    I actually think Kluwe/Kluwe’s personality would be a great fit in Oakland. We actually have one of the highest lesbian populations in the nation. That doesn’t really have anything to do anything, but I feel like the ‘Oakland’ mentality is substantially different than the ‘Raider’ mentality. And while I realize that the ‘Raidernation’ encompasses one of the larger fanbases (especially if they weren’t awful), having a guy like Kluwe could bring in more local fans.

  7. despinosa8 says: May 9, 2013 7:36 PM

    We are better off going with King for now. Kluwe was in the bottom half for yardage average. Plus the the Viks would have been out 1M in a roster bonus if they kept him after drafting a punter in the 5th. Big Reg will get us the best player at their position but rember he’s just a punter…

  8. thethunderofgunns says: May 9, 2013 7:47 PM

    Autumnwind you realize the task can’t just be given to King and he needs competition, correct? Every position needs competition and all need evaluation including King.

  9. raiderfanatic4life says: May 9, 2013 8:05 PM

    Just like we need a franchise quarterback, we need another franchise punter like Leckler was. Marquet King is the perfect developmental punter that we need. With incredible leg strength the only other issue is ball placement. You can’t teach leg strength but you can teach ball placement.

  10. raiderinvader says: May 9, 2013 8:11 PM

    Not really excited about these potential options.would prefer to go with in house option Marquette limited time I was pretty intrigued by the sheer power he put into his punts.give the kid a chance.isn’t that we kept him around on IR ?

  11. yssupasigninnamnotyep says: May 9, 2013 8:14 PM

    And there is spellingcops right on schedule. Where is your lover humbolt?

  12. raidernation81601 says: May 9, 2013 8:21 PM

    Hey spellingcops no one cares about your attempt at a thought or your opinion, any guesses why?
    for one thing you lack depth and substance oh the Raiders suck the Raiders suck, real thought provoking, and another thing is your unable to retort with out copy and paste.
    If the Raiders suck so bad go troll the Patriots page
    or who ever else you have an imaginary bone to pick with because Raider fans especially those from Cali can talk smack unlike you, you un original troll.
    I look forward to rereading this after you repost it
    raider nation out

  13. nosmak40 says: May 9, 2013 8:30 PM

    I recorded an episode of the “Biggest Loser” last year, turns out it was just a raiders game…

  14. raiderrob21 says: May 9, 2013 10:13 PM

    King will be the punter. They just want to bring in competition to push him and maybe get some pressure and stress situations involved and out of the way.


  15. charger383 says: May 9, 2013 10:49 PM

    Whoever is the Raider’s punter will always be in Ray Guy’s shadow

  16. yssupasigninnamnotyep says: May 9, 2013 10:49 PM

    Welcome nosmak40…please feel free to do your best Collins impersonation on spellingcops.

  17. raiderapologist says: May 9, 2013 11:06 PM

    King was stashed on IR last year because there was no chance Lechler was coming back. But King lacks experience and is wildly inconsistent. He’s a converted wide receiver from Fort Valley State. His net average in preseason last year was under 30 yards, and McKenzie is not going to continue the tradition of overpaying specialists.

  18. rubicon202 says: May 10, 2013 7:49 AM

    I think if Reggie is considering a punter, King must be a long way, away from being adequate. Understand that expectations are low but it doesn’t mean Special teams should suffer. For many years Sea-Bass & Shane were our best players who won a lot of games for us!

  19. rubicon202 says: May 10, 2013 7:52 AM

    nosmak40 says:
    I recorded an episode of the “Biggest Loser” last year, turns out it was just a raiders game…
    Dude, the purpose of a joke is to be funny in some sort of a way?

  20. nosmak40 says: May 10, 2013 7:19 PM

    Well ,you are a raider fan so you will probably “get it” next week…

  21. raidernation81601 says: May 11, 2013 10:00 AM

    Hey nosmak40 were you attempting to record the episode of biggest loser that featured your wife but your fat fingers pressed to many buttons and you ended up watching a raiders game in the off season?
    that is some trick, but not as good as the ones your mama use to turn.Who do you even represent you unoriginal bastard do you even like football or did you stumble on to this story due to your fat fingers you are out of your league here buddy go troll the Chiefs page if your looking for losers or better yet just look in the mirror raider nation out

  22. corporate1raider says: May 11, 2013 6:44 PM

    Hey Rubicon202 … I would say the biggest loser last season were the San Francisco 49ers … there is no bigger loss than losing the Superbowl … and not just losing but the way they lost.

    I’m actually glad there was a blackout because prior to that SF was getting smoked and would have lost 49-6 but with the blackout they regrouped, made a run and then lost in the most painful way imaginable.

    Ha. Biggest Losers? SF ‘9ers.

    Signed, Corporate Raider.

  23. corporate1raider says: May 11, 2013 6:50 PM

    San Francisco will not be back to the SB this season. Only twice has the team that has lost the Superbowl gone back the next year and won it. Most do not even make it back.

    The only two teams to accomplish this were Dallas and Miami in SBs VI & VII.

    It hasn’t happened in 40 years.

    I’m sure there are some who will say, “It’s due.”

    I say, those are pretty steep odds against.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!