While it’s only December and the Las Vegas Raiders have a Week 14 matchup against the Denver Broncos on Sunday, it might as well be the offseason in Las Vegas, seeing as the Raiders have nothing to play
for over the next five weeks. That makes the 2026 NFL draft and free agency the focus for this week’s mailbag.
Q: Should the Raiders’ 2026 draft strategy be focused on 2027, i.e., trading back for 2027 picks? From all I have read thus far, 2026 is not the year to be quarterback hunting, but 2027 is shaping up to be perhaps the best year since 1983. Thoughts?
A: I disagree that this year’s quarterback class is as bad as some are making it out to be. While there may not be an elite talent like a Patrick Mahomes/Josh Allen/Joe Burrow-type of prospect, I think guys like Fernando Mendoza, Dante Moore and Ty Simpson can be quality starters in the NFL and are worth using a first-round pick on.
Also, I’m not a fan of the ‘holdout for next year’s class’ philosophy when it comes to quarterbacks, because so much can change in a year when it comes to that position. Arch Manning and LaNorris Sellers are good examples from this season of how the perception of a prospect can change, as those two were expected to be competing for the No. 1 overall pick but are now viewed by many as guys who should go back to school. That’s in addition to having no idea what the 2027 draft order looks like, and winning as few as four or five games could throw off the entire strategy.
In other words, if there’s a quarterback that the Raiders like this year, just take him and go from there. The position is too important to get cute and risk playing yourself.
That being said, I do like where your head is at if there isn’t a QB that the front office likes or the team falls out of range to get one. I’ve been saying for a while that Las Vegas is looking at a multi-year rebuild, so loading up on picks wouldn’t be a bad idea. It just wouldn’t be the strategy I’d use if the Silver and Black end up with a top-three pick, which it looks like they will.
Q: It’s pretty slim pickings after those four. That’s pretty normal since there have only been five drafts in NFL history (1983, 1999, 2018, 2021 and 2024) that have had five or more quarterbacks taken in round one. Manning could be a first-rounder since he’s played better in the second half of the season, but I think he’s going back to school. Cincinnati’s Brendan Sorsby was getting some hype around the halfway point of the season, but he hasn’t been as sharp down the stretch for me to say he’s a Day 1 talent.
Building on the previous question, if Mendoza is the only big name to declare for the draft, then the idea of the Raiders trading back should pick up some steam. Conversely, trading up in that situation would be a possibility, too.
Q: Joe Fagnano, with a 6’4″ and 225 lb frame to go with 28 TDs and 1 interception, why haven’t we heard more about him?
A: It’s a combination of being a small-school guy and an older prospect since he spent four years at Maine before transferring and playing the last three seasons at UConn. The best way for Fagnano to build some draft buzz is to prove himself against better competition at an event like the Senior or Shrine Bowls. Then, he could be this year’s Tyler Shough, who was a seventh-year guy and didn’t have much hype before putting together a strong week in Mobile. Granted, that still might be lofty for Fagnano since Shough had Power 4 experience.
Q: What do you think Shedeur Sanders’ trade capital is now worth – a third? Would it be worth trading for him and then trading our #1-3 for more choices to fill more needs and, maybe, if necessary, draft a QB next year? Let him compete with Cam Miller in the preseason.
A: I don’t think Sanders’ trade value has changed after two mediocre at best starts. He’s made a few nice throws, but he has the same issues with pocket management that he had at Colorado, and I haven’t been that impressed with what he’s done over the last three weeks. So, no, it wouldn’t be worth giving up a Day 2 pick for Sanders. Hold onto the draft capital and dive into this year’s class.
Q: With this season being a total disaster, are you surprised that the players haven’t called a team meeting with Pete Carroll to air their concerns, especially after having lost 6 in a row and 10 out of their last 11 games? Last year, the players called a team meeting with Antonio Pierce after they’d lost 5 in a row and had a 2 – 7 record. And, the year before that, they called one with Josh McDaniels when they were 3 – 4.
A: To be honest, I haven’t thought about this at all until this question, lol. I guess it’s somewhat surprising considering that it happened with the last two head coaches. On the other hand, this is a roster that has a lot of players who are in their first year with the Raiders and it’s everyone’s first year playing for Carroll, minus the guys like Geno Smith and Tyler Lockett who are firmly in his corner.
Those meetings with McDaniels and Pierce happened during their second years on the job, so maybe the players don’t feel like they’re on that level with Carroll yet. Obviously, that’s an assumption, but it makes sense to me at least.
Q: Pete has taken a 4-13 team and has made it worse. He needs to go…if Mike Tomlin was let go and the Raiders didn’t make a strong push, I would be very disappointed. With that being said, which two offensive linemen that will be current free agents would you back up the Brinks truck for?
A: I got a good chuckle out of the pivot from Carroll should be fired to asking about free-agent offensive linemen. You threw me for a loop there! LOL.
These guys may not be “back up the Brinks truck” worthy, but here are a few free-agent offensive linemen I’d be interested in:
- C Tyler Linderbaum (assuming Jackson Powers-Johnson is going to stay at guard)
- G Alijah Vera-Tucker
- G Ed Ingram
- G Daniel Faalele
- T Rasheed Walker (problem is, he’s only played LT)
- T Darian Kinnard (definitely not ‘Brinks truck’ quality but is worth taking a chance on with a cheap deal)
- T Braxton Jones (combo of Walker and Kinnard, has only played LT and a cheaper target)
In full disclosure, I’m looking at younger free agents who would be getting their second NFL contract. Linderbaum and Vera-Tucker would be my top targets from that list, depending on what the plan is with JPJ.
Q: I initially thought Tom Brady could help with quarterback development. I realize he’s not a coach, but what does he bring to the organization other than posing for the television cameras? Prior to being granted minimal ownership, he was seen by Mark Davis’s side regularly. Mark Davis’s ornament? Still sour over the “tuck rule”.
A: Apparently, Chip Kelly, for 11 weeks…
Brady is definitely involed in football decisions for the organization. It’s been known for a while that he helped influecne the Raiders to draft Cam Miller and, recently, it came out that he was pushing hard for Ben Johnson to be the head coach before Johnson took the Bears’ job last offseason.
That’s just a couple of examples and the overarching point is that Brady is more than just a pretty face and has pull within the building, but the results are certainly very underwhelming so far.
Q: Why would Pete hire Chip Kelly as his offensive coordinator but not let him use his own playbook? Do most head coach’s force their own identity on their coordinator? I’d assume since he’s a defensive guy and paid Chip so much, he’d stay out of the way or force his identity on Patrick Graham.
A: Make no mistake about it, Kelly was using his college-style playbook in Las Vegas. Carroll was certainly influencing the play calling toward the end of Kelly’s tenure, but that was more about what type of plays (i.e. calling play-action or running the ball in specific situations) than the head coach taking the playbook away from the offensive coordinator. That doesn’t happen with good teams/successful offenses, but it does when you’re averaging under 15 points game and have the second-worst offense in the league.
Q: Do you think Mark Davis pays attention to how other coaches have quickly resurrected their teams, i.e., New England, Denver, Seattle, Jacksonville, Houston, Indianapolis, and how they did it?
A: I think Davis pays attention, I just think he’s bad at picking the right head coach. Part of his problem is that he clearly favors the retreads, going that route with four out of his six hires (Jack Del Rio, Jon Gruden, McDaniels and Carroll). Meanwhile, four (Seahawks, Jaguars, Texans and Colts) out of the six teams you list there took a chance on a young, first-year head coach.
In my opinion, Mark needs to focus less on what head coach candidates have done and more on what they can do moving forward.
Q: If John Spytek can’t or won’t do it, why doesn’t Mark tell Pete he can either switch quarterbacks and start playing all the rookies or resign? That way, even if he has to pay Pete, he accomplishes something that needs to be done and doesn’t have to fire him.
A: It’s just not who he is as an owner. For better or worse, Davis takes the hands off approach when it comes to football decisions. I think it’s more likely that he just outright fires Carroll than demands any sort of personnel changes.
A: Vance had decent tape at USC last year and was solid during the preseason. That being said, I’m not going to say that an undrafted rookie who has only played in a couple of regular season games is going to be the long-term answer at nickel. Without a doubt, the primary reason he got called up is because Darnay Holmes has been terrible.
But I am interested to see what Vance can do over the next month. He has a chance to prove himself and who knows, maybe he surprises people. Or he sucks and the Raiders are in the same spot they’re already in. Might as well find out!
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.
