The Raiders signed Jimmy Garoppolo last offseason, but he struggled early in the campaign. That was followed by a pair of missed contests and the midseason firings of Josh McDaniels and Dave Ziegler. By the time the veteran quarterback was healthy, he had been benched in favor of rookie Aidan O’Connell. 
[RELATED: Recapping Raiders’ Offseason]
The latter held starting duties through the remainder of the season, a period with interim head coach Antonio Pierce at the helm. Pierce was hired on a full-time basis after receiving the endorsement of several high-profile Raiders players. One of those was wideout Davante Adams, who appears to have had a say in the decision to replace Garoppolo with O’Connell.
A scene from Netflix’s Receiver series shows Adams being asked his thoughts on the QB decision. The three-time All-Pro replies, “well, my opinion on that was that I signed off on that, and that’s just the reality of it” (h/t Michael David Smith of Pro Football Talk).
It comes as little surprise Adams’ opinion would be asked about a quarterback switch, but his remark suggests further frustration between he and the team could have emerged had Garoppolo stayed in place. Adams joined Vegas in the hopes of reuniting with former college teammate Derek Carr, but that was only the case for one year. Carr’s departure prompted the ill-fated Garoppolo signing and questions about Adams’ future with the Raiders. It seems his desire to remain with the organization was a factor in his view on the shift to O’Connell.
“I love Jimmy.” the 31-year-old added. “He’s a great guy, but something had to happen in order for us to have a chance down the stretch, and for me to remain a Raider, in all honesty.”
Adams recently offered a public commitment to Vegas despite continued interest on the part of former teammates (including Aaron Rodgers) to have him seek a trade elsewhere. Such a move is unlikely at this point, but it is clear Adams had his short- and long-term future in mind when giving his thoughts on the Raiders’ 2023 QB depth chart. O’Connell is still in place, and he will spend training camp competing for the No. 1 gig with Gardner Minshew.
As for Adams, three years remain on his contract (although no guaranteed salary is in place beyond 2024). The six-time Pro Bowler’s cap hits are scheduled to spike next offseason, so an extension or other adjustment could be needed by that point. It will be interesting to see how he meshes with O’Connell and/or Minshew over the course of the coming campaign during Pierce’s first full year as head coach.
“MeMeMe”
It’s all about HIM. Him and Aaron Rodgers deserve each other
He also talked about Garoppolo being a great guy and about what gave the team the best chance to win. I get disliking Rodgers, but I don’t see the need to trash Adams.
I used to love Adams until he bullied his way out of GB because of the franchise tag. Play the deal, play the tag if you’re tagged because that’s the deal the players and union voted for AGAIN which was to continue allowing franchise tags and nonguaranteed deals.
And then he shoved that guy in the tunnel like a baby.
Lost a ton of respect for him.
The guy caught 95 touchdowns for the Packers and made five Pro Bowls. He deserved a long term deal at a market rate and had every right to fight the franchise tag. Your ideas of honor around contracts sometimes just don’t jibe with the business of the NFL.
At that time, the Packers had several veterans dissatisfied with the new front office’s approach of dismissing any chance they had to compete and instead to focus on building their own roster. Down the road we’ll see if they end up being correct, but there were two good years where the Packers were a game away from the championship and flamed out. We can blame Rodgers all we like for that, but the reality is that in that time, the front office chose to not add significant starting pieces that could have given the team a better chance to win.
As I said, the current generation of Packers might end up winning those accolades, but it’s hard to blame veterans like Adams for not wanting to stay around a team that wasn’t interested in taking full advantage of a championship window in the players’ waning years. After years of Ted Thompson settling for a slow approach, the expectation of more of the same (or, more accurately, the desire for Gutekunst to simply build his own roster for its own sake) is understandably frustrating for a star who may only have one contract left.
Not drafting any offense for many seasons probably didn’t help
My issue is that the player PAY unions for sub par agreements. The players deserve guaranteed money, benefits, and much more. They continually pay a union to negotiate deals on their behalf that end in the players not getting what all other major sports have.
Then the players blame the team and ownership.
Can’t have it with ways.
Then you shouldn’t be opposed to players using the leverage they have to advocate for themselves. The NFLPLA absolutely could do a better job historically than it has, but the union is always currently standing on the shoulders of what came before. NFL players are also at a huge disadvantage because their careers are shorter and more perilous.
They have all of the leverage though. If they simply told the union this is non negotiable I’m pretty sure canceled games would result in a win for the players.
Players playing both sides of the issue supporting their union meanwhile getting the least amount of utility out of what they pay for and complaining about the team for something that is their own doing, and even worse, sponsored/paid for by the player.
This is simply not true. Owners have much more leverage in labor disputes and you’re treating a dead end tactic as automatic.
Then why does every other league have it? Players sacrificed so the rest can benefit.
It would be hard to get sure but the NFL is the most profitable sport in the most desirable country in the world.
Start with minimum percentages, start with SOMETHING.
J-E-T-S jets jets jets
Yes, please go to the jets. We all want to watch that circus!
“For me to remain a Raider”?
You are under contract pal! He must be too young to remember what the Raiders did to Marcus Allen in the prime of his career?
You don’t have a say in being a Raider. Play or don’t get paid
You’ve been under a rock than. Players demand trades semi-regularly and teams usually honor them. If not it’s not a dunk on the player, it’s a classless move by a trashy organization.
Contracts mean nothing for star players any more. Organizations want to be seen as “doing right” by their players in order to be an attractive free agent destination; if that means having to give into occasional trade demands, they’ll often do it.
Al Davis was in charge then. Mark is nothing like AL.
Me me me me lol
Where there’s smoke there’s fire. This guy is not happy. IMO, same thing going on in Miami with T. Hill. Hill for Adams straight up. Both r in their last year of guaranteed money. Hill makes a little bit more and cap hit is higher but that can be worked out. Each gets a new start and like Houston is doing with Diggs, future money will based on 2024 performance.