The Las Vegas Raiders are chasing the No. 1 pick, but the real fight is whether to draft Fernando Mendoza/Dante Moore or trade down and build first.
Sin City is barreling toward the kind of offseason that splits fan bases in half: No. 1 pick dreams, quarterback cravings, and the familiar fear that Las Vegas will force a savior into a situation that keeps swallowing them. At this point, it’s become cyclical for Raider Nation. However, many folks are legitimately wondering: what is the plan, and who’s actually driving it?
Reports are saying that head coach Pete Carroll is indeed on his way out. Naturally, general manager John Spytek would have the full reins with minority owner Tom Brady at his side. Still, no one seems to know who really wields power as the Raiders’ puppet master. For that reason, the No. 1 pick should cause some concern—what’s the vision, and which signal-caller fits that mold? Or, should the Raiders opt for a different approach?
That is why the Fernando Mendoza vs. Dante Moore argument is already louder than the football itself. It is not just about who throws the prettier deep ball or who looks calmer under pressure. The question, at its core, is straightforward: have the Raiders’ actions warranted a high draft selection for a quarterback? Or, perhaps a less popular approach: is it wiser to trade down, gather more picks, and build a supporting cast that won’t undermine the next franchise player?
If you’re the Raiders, would you trade the No. 1 pick for a giant haul?
Or is the smarter—and far less popular—move to trade down, gather more picks, and build a supporting cast that will not undermine the next franchise player?
Raiders fans have earned the impatience. The organization has cycled through plans, play-callers, and quarterbacks, then acted surprised when the offense still looks like a temporary installation. When a season collapses, the No. 1 pick becomes a shortcut in the public imagination. Draft the quarterback, sell hope, and move on.
That logic is also how franchises stay trapped.
A quarterback can raise your ceiling. He can also expose everything underneath him. If the offensive line is unstable, if the run game is a suggestion, if the coaching staff is changing terminology by the year, the rookie is not developing—he is surviving. That is how the “can’t-miss” prospect becomes the next cautionary tale, blamed for structural problems he did not create.
Who is more likely to survive Las Vegas: Fernando Mendoza, Dante Moore, or neither?
Mendoza and Moore are appealing for different reasons. Mendoza profiles as the steady operator, the kind of passer who wins with timing and decision-making. Moore sells the modern upside: live arms, creativity, and the flashes that make evaluators talk themselves into stardom. Either one would energize the market. Neither one should be asked to fix the market.
That is why the trade-down idea keeps surfacing, even if it irritates the “take the QB and don’t overthink it” crowd. The argument is not cowardice. It is sequencing. Stockpile picks. Rebuild the trenches. You then add a receiver who can separate and a defense that does not require perfection to survive a Sunday. Put the next quarterback in a situation where competence is the baseline, not the exception.
Yes, there is risk in waiting. The league rarely offers clean quarterback timelines. But forcing one is risky, too. The Raiders have lived it: draft the savior, rush the timetable, then act shocked when the same flaws resurface under a new jersey number. This offseason will shape the next five years in Las Vegas. If they believe Mendoza or Moore is the guy, take him—and build like it. If they do not, faking certainty at No. 1 is not bold. It is expensive. Either way, the answer is not just a quarterback. It is whether the Raiders can finally operate like a franchise that deserves one.
*Top Photo: Ramble Illustration/Getty Images