The 24-hour rule has long passed, meaning it’s time to put the Las Vegas Raiders’ Week 1 win over the Miami Dolphins behind us and start focusing on the Week 2 matchup against a familiar AFC West foe: the Los Angeles Chargers. To help preview the game, let’s get into this week’s mailbag!
Q: Do you think Rob Leonard dials up the pressure this week and goes after the Chargers’ IOL? O/U 45% blitz rate for this one?
A: I’ll take the under on 45 percent because only two teams — the Vikings (mad man Brian
Flores at over 80%) and Commanders (50.9%) — were above that mark in Week 1, according to Ryan Paganetti on X/Twitter. Granted, the Jets (44.9%), Ravens (43.4%) and Lions (43.0%) were pretty close to the number. Meanwhile, the Raiders blitzed just 24.0% of the time against Miami, which ranked 18th across the league.
Could Leonard dial up the heat more in Los Angeles? Sure, and I think you’re onto something about the Chargers’ interior offensive line, which is the weakest part of their roster. With free-agent signing Tyler Biadasz out for the year, they have a rookie center in Jake Slaughter, meaning the Bolts have a young lineman making his second NFL start in the position that typically helps set the protection scheme.
Having a veteran quarterback like Justin Herbert helps with that, but the Shanahan coaching tree (which L.A.’s new offensive coordinator Mike McDaniel is a branch of) typically likes to have the center set the protection to take that off the quarterback’s plate. It sounds like McDaniel has adjusted with Biadasz’s injury, since Jim Harbaugh said this week that Herbert calls the team’s protections (h/t ESPN’s Kris Rhim). But it’s still a new offense that doesn’t have a veteran center as a fail-safe if things aren’t going well.
Circling back to the question, given the Chargers’ weakness up front, I think it’s safe to assume Leonard will at least give them a variety of looks at the beginning of the game and adjust later on if needed. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the actual blitz rate (rushing five or more defenders) stays pretty consistent.
Instead, I’d expect to see more simulated pressures where the Raiders give a blitz look pre-snap and have an off-ball linebacker (Quay Walker or Nakobe Dean) rush the passer while a lineman (Malcolm Koonce, Kwity Paye or one of the defensive tackles) drops into a zone coverage. Or creeper blitzes, which are the same concept of rushing a typical coverage defender and having a typical pass rusher drop into coverage; it just doesn’t present a blitz look pre-snap.
That was primarily how Leonard manufactured pressure in Week 1, and is a good way to keep a young or bad offensive line guessing. It makes it more difficult for the line to know where the pass-rush is coming from and can lead to missed communictions/assignments and free rushers for the defense. That’s where not having a veteran center can really hurt because they have more experience to point out potential blitz or pass-rush threats pre-snap, versus a rookie who is just trying to not screw up the snap count.
Q: The defense performed better than expected, granted it was against Miami. Do you think it has potential to be a top 15 defense this year?
A: If you had asked me this a week ago, I would have said no chance after watching how they struggled to stop the run during the preseason. However, I was very impressed by Leonard’s scheme and have a lot more confidence that the defense can put up league-average numbers this year. There’s definitely the potential to get up to being a Top 15 unit if they continue to play like they did last Sunday.
But to pour some cold water on the hot Raiders’ defense, I don’t want to overreact to a performance against a team competing for the No. 1 pick. So, this week — and really the next three games with the Chargers, Saints and Chiefs on the upcoming schedule — will be a better indicator for how good Las Vegas’ defense really is. If the unit continues to look strong down that stretch, now we’re cooking with gasoline!
Q: Week 1 Fact or Fiction:
- This Raiders team is well coached and well schemed and could be looking at .500 or better this year? Or the flip-side version: all they did was beat the Dolphins, and Miami is so bad it’s going to make our players and scheme look great?
- Kwity Paye/Treydan Stukes are going to be fringe Pro Bowlers?
A: The first bullet is the million-dollar question right now that we’ll have a better answer to after Sunday. There’s no doubt that the schedule makers threw Vegas a bone with the Week 1 matchup against Miami, and the Dolphins’ roster is so young that it can give a false sense of hope for the Raiders moving forward. However, I was very impressed with Kubiak’s and Leonard’s play calling in Week 1.
Kubiak did an excellent job of finding creative ways to get Ashton Jeanty the ball, which was huge with Brock Bowers out and a cast of wide receivers that even the coach has admitted leaves something to be desired. Also, he did an excellent job with his 21 personnel packages, which again, is especially impressive without the team’s best tight end.
Defensively, Leonard had all three levels constantly moving and, in addition to what was said above about manufacturing pressure, had a good scheme to get Maxx Crosby one-on-one matchups. My tone on the Tape Don’t Lie film review conveyed this: I haven’t been this excited about a defensive scheme from the Raiders in years.
A good scheme can translate from week to week and help overcome a talent gap. However, there are plenty of good coaches in the NFL, and it is still a talent-driven league. But I definitely think there is more reason to be optimistic about the Raiders moving forward, and that they can win more games than originally expected.
Paye and Stukes played pretty well last week, but calling them fringe Pro Bowlers would be a stretch at this point.
While he had eight pressures and two sacks in the opener, Paye is still a complementary rusher. He doesn’t get a lot of quick wins, and his best trait is having a high motor. Those types of players are valuable to a defense because they can come up with clean-up sacks, where the coverage is holding up or another rusher wins but misses the tackle.
That’s the difference between a quarterback extending the play and beating the defense on scrambles versus a drive-killing loss of yards. However, that’s not exactly a Pro Bowl-caliber type of player since Paye’s production is reliant on his teammates.
As for Stukes, he had the interception and a handful of impressive reps mixed in during his NFL debut. But he also had a few “rookie moments” with a missed assignment, a missed tackle and a play in coverage where he looked up for the ball late, resulting in a first-down catch.
Don’t get me wrong, I was very encouraged with how the rookie played, especially considering it was his first start at a new position. However, let’s pump the brakes a bit and let him play a few more games before we start throwing around the postseason accolades.
Q: How much will the Chargers miss Jesse Minter this year?
A: If the season opener was any indication, a lot!
Los Angeles gave up 393 yards to Arizona last week, which would have been the second-most its defense allowed all of last season. What’s even more surprising is the Cardinals were viewed in the same category as the Dolphins heading into the season. Maybe that’s a sign Arizona will be better than expected, but the Chargers also had a lot of missed assignments or moments where their defense wasn’t on the same page.
That indicates the players aren’t comfortable with the scheme yet, and that’s surprising because the reason Harbaugh hired Chris O’Leary as defensive coordinator is that O’Leary was on the staff as the safeties coach under Minter in 2024. Presumably, that should mean the scheme is pretty similar to what the players are used to.
I can’t say I’ve really dived into the differences between the Chargers’ 2025 and 2026 defenses to know for sure. But you don’t see a lot of former Western Michigan defensive coordinators making the jump to the NFL unless there’s some familiarity with the club and the head coach wants to keep the scheme at least somewhat consistent.
To be fair, Week 1 can be screwy, as plenty of people have been reminding everyone that the Raiders beat the eventual AFC Champion Patriots last year. So, O’Leary can certainly turn things around after one bad game. However, the early returns aren’t exactly high…
Q: With Kwity Paye, Malcolm Koonce and Patrick Johnson playing significant snaps, would Keyron Crawford have been inactive for the first month of the season anyway?
A: Maybe, but I’m also not 100% convinced that Johnson would have made the team if Crawford didn’t get put on injured reserve ahead of cutdown day. The Raiders are only rostering four edges, and they weren’t going to cut a rookie they just spent a Top 75 pick on. So, someone at another position who is currently on the roster would have been left off to keep Johnson as the fifth edge.
Granted, the coaching staff could have kept the veteran on the practice squad and called him up for the first three games to see if someone else got hurt to create an extra roster spot before having to promote him to the 53-man. Or they could have done some finagling where Johnson doesn’t make the team initially, then a change or two happens after cutdown day, and he gets brought back that way, similar to what happened with Segun Olubi.
Ultimately, I think the decision to make Crawford or Johnson active on game day if they were both on the roster would have come down to who can contribute more on special teams.
According to Pro Football Focus, Johnson only played in six snaps defensively last week, but he logged 20 on special teams. Both players participated on special teams during the preseason, and for what it’s worth, the veteran had the higher PFF grade in that department (72.5 to 61.4).
So, you could definitely be correct that Crawford wouldn’t have been active even if he was healthy. I’m just not sure there would have been room for the 28-year-old had the rookie not suffered a significant injury.
Q: When exactly did Brock Bowers re-injure his knee, and when was the meniscus procedure performed?
A: To be clear, I don’t have any sources or inside knowledge of this, so my answer is more speculative than factual.
I get the feeling that Bowers re-injured his knee either during or shortly after the first preseason game. The Raiders played the Cardinals on Aug. 13, where he played in just one snap (per PFF) despite the rest of the starting offense getting a full 10-play drive. Four days later, videos on social media surfaced of him being ginger with the knee.
No first-stringers played in Houston, but Bowers did suit up against San Francisco and didn’t quite look the same, according to my colleague Marcus Johnson. Marcus has a theory that the procedure actually happened shortly after the 49ers game, and that’s unverified, but it would make more sense to me than Bowers going under the knife on the Tuesday before the season opener.
That timeline lines up better with the idea that he’ll only have to miss “a game or two”. Even if it was a minor surgery, I don’t buy that someone can have their knee cut open and operated on and be ready to play in an NFL game 12 or 19 days later. On top of that, the situation doesn’t make sense because it’s the same knee Bowers injured last year, and it would be pretty dumb to rush a player who is a key part of the organization’s long-term plan onto the field given the circumstances.
So, I don’t have a hard answer for you. But the story, the way it’s being presented, doesn’t add up to me.
Q: I was wrong about DJ Glaze. I know the new coaching helped, but did Brady’s guy help him with his feet and lateral movement? Did he lose weight or get stronger?
A: I’m right there with ya! I thought Glaze was a prime candidate to get moved to guard, but he had an excellent game last week. What’s even more impressive to me is that Chop Robinson has given Glaze problems in the past, going back to their college days, but the right tackle rose to the occasion.
Glaze is still listed at 331 pounds, so he doesn’t appear to have dropped much weight. And, at least to me, he doesn’t look much more slimmed down than he has in the past. But his footwork/footspeed did look improved in pass pro. Also, during training camp, Rick Dennison talked about getting Glaze to maximize his arm length, and Glaze’s hand usage was much better than before.
In the past, he’d keep his hands very wide and invite pass-rushers into his chest rather than striking or punching to make the first significant contact. The third-year pro was much more consistent about keeping his hands tight to take advantage of his near 35-inch arms last Sunday. Hopefully, that continues moving forward.
Q: I thought Kirk Cousins was throwing pretty well at the end of last year with the Falcons. Are you surprised at his arm weakness? Did he injure his elbow again? Did this not show up in practices? I couldn’t tell during his preseason outings.
A: I’m not surprised. In my opinion, Cousins’ arm has been dead since he tore his Achilles during his last season in Minnesota (2023). That can impact a quarterback’s ability to drive through the ground and use the legs to throw and get velocity on the ball, especially when the injury happens at 35 years old.
When the Raiders played the Falcons on Monday Night Football a couple of years ago, I noticed Cousins’ arm was pretty weak when watching film leading up to the game. That popped up during the contest too, leading to him getting benched the following week.
Cousins did play better in relief of Michael Penix Jr. last year, but his arm is pretty dead at this point in his career. To me, there was a noticeable and significant difference between the velocity of his and Fernando Mendoza’s passes during the preseason, and based on what beat reporters have said, that was the case during training camp, too.
To my knowledge, Cousins hasn’t suffered another injury. He’s just a 38-year-old trying to play a young man’s game after a significant injury, and his arm is what it is at this stage: deceased.
Q: My concern this week is the passing game. Brock will most likely sit this one out, and if he does, Cousins will miss him sorely. The Chargers, who I think are not as good as the experts believe, are still many times better than Miami. Do you think the ground game works this week with our improved O-line? If not, what is your level of confidence in Captain Kirk?
A: Similar questions here from two different people, and I think my answer above shines enough light on my confidence in Captain Kirk, LOL! If you’re struggling to read between the lines: it’s not high!
Until Bowers is back in the fold (and completely healthy), the Raiders’ offense is going to be highly dependent on the running game/Jeanty. Obviously, Las Vegas’ rushing attack and, more specifically, the offensive line looked much improved last week. But this Sunday will test whether that was a fluke/more indicative of the opponent, or a sign that the unit is turning the corner.
For all that went wrong with the Chargers last week, they actually did a decent job of stopping the run. Yes, the Cardinals had 116 rushing yards as a team, but they only averaged 3.4 yards per carry, while running backs Tyler Allgeier and Jeremiyah Love were both under four yards a tote. Also, Los Angeles’ 61.4 PFF run defense grade ranked 12th, and the club was 15th in Pro Football Network’s run defense impact score (75.5).
It was the passing game that really did the Bolts’ defense in, especially tight end Trey McBride, who was Arizona’s leading receiver with nine catches for 95 yards and a touchdown. So, Bowers being doubtful for Sunday really hurts.
I have confidence that the Raiders’ offensive line can continue to show growth. But, sorry for being repetitive, this week is the real test. I look at it like a college team playing an FCS School in Week 1 to build some confidence before turning around and playing an opponent of the same (or maybe even higher) caliber in Week 2.
Hopefully, Harbaugh doesn’t take a page out of his alma mater’s book and look like crap in the season opener, only to bounce back the following game. And yes, I’m considering Michigan 1-1 because that was some B.S. against Western Michigan! The Broncos won that game!
[Side note: this might be the first and last time WMU gets mentioned twice in the same article on this website!]
Q: Should we be surprised by how big of a contract that Michael Mayer got?
A: I was pretty shocked to see Mayer get a contract that made him the fourth-highest (now fifth-highest) paid tight end in the league. Honestly, I was shocked to see him get a contract extension ahead of the season in general.
I understand that Mayer can have a bigger role in Kubiak’s offense, and the Raiders clearly believe in him long-term, so they’re trying to get ahead of the market. But maybe wait, like, I don’t know, four games to see how he performs in the new offense before handing out a big contract extension?
That’s just my two cents, and I don’t think anyone can reasonably say the body of work the 2024 second-round pick has done so far justifies top-five money at his position. Sure, he can get better and be more productive down the line, which is what the Raiders are betting on. But typically, players who get paid that much have both a strong track record and future value.
All of that being said, the devil is always in the details when it comes to contract extensions, and there was a lot of “sticker shock” when it comes to Mayer’s new deal. Over the Cap dropped the structure of the contract earlier this week, and it’s basically a one-year extension with two club options.
All of the guaranteed money is in 2027, and Vegas can cut him with a post-June 1 designation during the 2028 or 2029 offseasons while only taking on about $2.3 million of dead cap, per OTC, if things aren’t going well. So, I have to give credit where credit is due and say that the organization and John Spytek did a good job protecting themselves while getting ahead of the market. That makes me more comfortable with Mayer’s extension than the way it was initially reported.
That’ll do it for this week’s mailbag. Thank you all for submitting questions and, as your weekly reminder, if you’d like to have your questions answered in a future column, tweet them at me, @MHolder95, email them to SBPQuestions1@gmail.com or look for our weekly call for questions on the site. The latter will continue to publish on Thursdays.
