Report: Raiders have “definite interest” in Freeman

Getty Images

We’ve been keeping an eye on the Raiders when it comes to Josh Freeman, for a variety of reasons.  First, the current regime has whiffed twice on quarterback acquisitions.  Second, Raiders offensive coordinator Greg Olson recently has raved about Freeman; the two men worked together for three years in Tampa.  Third, it feels like a Raiders thing to do.

Rick Stroud of the Tampa Bay Times reports that the Raiders indeed have a “definite interest” in Freeman.

It’s unclear when or how (or if) the Raiders would make their move.  They play late tonight (11:35 p.m. ET), and then travel to Kansas City on Sunday.  The bye week comes after that, which would give Freeman two weeks to get ready to contribute.

The most obvious question regarding Freeman and the Raiders is whether Freeman wants to be a member of the team.  With the Broncos, Chiefs, and Chargers in the division, Freeman most likely won’t have anything to tell his former head coach to stick in his trophy case at the end of the 2013 season.

Then comes the question of whether it would be a one-year arrangement or a multi-year deal.  The Raiders don’t really have the cap room to give Freeman a big-money contract.  And Freeman’s leverage right now isn’t as high as it could be in January.

And what about Terrelle Pryor?  He has become a fan favorite, but the team is only 1-3.  Would he be benched, traded, or cut if Freeman comes to town?

Whether Pryor or Matt Flynn (who has $6.5 million guaranteed this year) or Matt McGloin, someone presumably would have to go if Freeman arrives.

34 responses to “Report: Raiders have “definite interest” in Freeman

  1. It’s simple really. Noodle arm Flynn would be cut. I doubt he plays another down in the NFL

  2. Clearly it is Flynn who goes.

    He has already been demoted to 3rd string; I would have cut him and moved Tyler Wilson up from the practice squad.

  3. We can fairly list any number of pros and cons about Freeman. He believes he is and wants to be a starter. That’s fine if there’s a team ready to plug him in as that – but at this point – and given the circumstances – he looks more like a reclamation project right now. Not many teams or coaches willing to take that on during their season.

  4. It’s rather simple, we need to create real competition at all positions. Sign Freeman, cut Flynn. The team is better for it….

    Goes for every position on the team with exception of placekicker…….

  5. I don’t get all the Freeman hoopla. He had one good season years ago, half a good season last year, appears to have an attitude problem, and has a Tebow-esque completion percentage this season. Can he restart his career? Maybe. All the coverage doesn’t appear to be currently justifed, IMO.

  6. Picking up Freeman would be the worst thing the Raiders could do. It would mean the ghost of Mr. Davis is still running the team. What kind of message does it send to this team. A team although 1-3 is playing with signs of improvement and heart. Don’t Freeman, he would not bring anything to this team.

  7. The Raiders are 1-3, and you’re pinning that on Pryor? He has played well – much better than Freeman this year. He’s in the top half in passer rating, and still learning. They’d be nuts to sit Pryor and start Josh.

  8. If the Raiders sign Freeman I would have a hard time continuing to defend Big Reg and his moves. I was on board with the Flynn move and the demotion of Flynn to third string. I was cool with taking a chance and whiffing on Wilson.

    But signing Freeman and the instant controversy that would ensue at QB would turn the team back into the circus I thought they had moved on from. I understand the fact that the Raiders are rebuilding and are in desperate need of a franchise QB, but this just doesn’t sit right with this Raider fan.

    Problem is though, the Raiders still need a franchise QB. So is it so bad to take a cheap shot and see what happens? Even if it’s Josh Freeman?

  9. Freeman’s “camp” is leaking this to try to force other teams that might have an interest to hurry up with their pursuit.
    The longer no team tries to sign him the lower will be his contract. Let the bidding war commence.

  10. Freeman certainly meets or exceeds Raiders’ performance standards. That’s a good thing. Oh, wait a minute. Just what are those Raiders’ standards again?

  11. I’ve been predicting this would be the case. Not that it takes a crystal ball to see that the Raiders are in need of veteran QB help. But despite their need, the fact that they would be making moves to get a (very) troubled guy, with limited to no upside, just indicates that the Raiders are still finding it hard to shake the demons which have wrecked that team for more than a decade now.

  12. Raiders already have a franchise quarterback. Name one quarterback anywhere that would do better than Terrelle Pryor with this offensive line, backs and receivers, and he’s still learning.

  13. Just think if Peyton Manning was judged on his first 3 games. We have to give Pryor a chance to prove he can’t do it. Until then, the guy throws a nice ball, he’s accurate and seems to have a good head for football. Sure he won’t be able to be a “running quarterback” forever, but it’s only been 3 games this season. And, this article is pure speculation.

  14. If so, this would establish how desperate the Raiders are and how they lack any other solutions to being the kings of the NFL bottom dwellers.

    You do realize how much more desperate the Raiders are than the Jags or even the Bucs if they make this move?

  15. Freeman’s performance in Tampa was no illusion. He could have earned in the 100’s of millions with a decent showing this year. Instead he mentally checked out. Takes a strong man to resist the party atmosphere of Tampa. He wasn’t.

  16. Pryor is a work-in-progress and we’ll probably be better equipped to judge if he’s a long-term answer at the end of the season.

    As for other options, I’m hoping that McGloin gets some series under his belt to see how he looks in regular season action (he looked good in preseason).

    I can’t say that I’m really excited about Josh Freeman, and making a ‘splash’ by bringing him in would to me be a retro (ie. Al Davis type of) move. I would rather wait until the spring to acquire a lower profile (and more productive) cheap FA.

  17. if u want the #1 pick raiders, u need to sign freeman and let him start the rest of the year, yr wish will be granted

  18. IF the Raiders can peddle Flynn, Freeman would be a big addition. I would not be shocked to see them quietly trying to dump Flynn. They know what they have in him and it isn’t good.

  19. Bye week gives him two weeks to contribute? LOL! Two years wouldn’t be enough for this lazy, over-compensated, under-achieving clown.

  20. Bringing in Freeman would only drive TP2 to become better. Pryor is a player that has become overtaken with an obsession for becoming better.

  21. Wake up Raider fans McKenzie is a bust as GM. He has made mistake after mistake. Colossal bad signing with Flynn then last years debacle with bringing in an offensive coordinator that already failed before in Oakland. Freeman is a cancer .

  22. nflfolly says: Oct 6, 2013 12:13 PM

    Wake up Raider fans McKenzie is a bust as GM. He has made mistake after mistake. Colossal bad signing with Flynn then last years debacle with bringing in an offensive coordinator that already failed before in Oakland. Freeman is a cancer .
    Knapp was a bad choice for OC, but it’s not like like they were sorting through a long list of applicants. As for Flynn, the Seahwaks spent 10M on him for no production and two late draft picks, but nobody is calling Schneider a bust. McKenzie came in with an empty cupboard and $11 in his pocket. He can’t turn that mess around in a hurry.

Leave a Reply

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