The Las Vegas Raiders' Week 8 matchup against the New York Jets is their most winnable game over the next five weeks. Four of Las Vegas' next five games will be on the road, starting Sunday against the Jets. But that's also even more reason to be concerned.

After starting the season out on a roll, the Raiders have lost four straight games. The inconsistency they have shown across all seven games appears to be something Klint Kubiak and his coaching staff are still working to fix. As frustrating as it may be, it is to be expected.

Las Vegas' offseason of change improved the roster, and so did adding new pieces to the coaching staff. Few, if any, teams in the league underwent as many organizational and operational changes as the Raiders did.

The positive impacts of those moves were on display during Las Vegas' 3-0 start. The negative impacts of so many additions in a short time frame, albeit quality ones, have been on display during the Raiders' four-game losing streak.

Tougher Competition

Las Vegas has struggled to find success on either side of the ball since the quality of their competition jumped. Since facing the better teams in the league, the Raiders have looked much further away from competing with the league's top teams than they did when they were 3-0.

With the season about halfway over, it is now fair to wonder whether Las Vegas' struggles against the 2-5 New Orleans Saints in Week 3, and their struggles pulling away from the still-winless Los Angeles Chargers, were actually confirmation that they are closer to those teams than the league's elite.

Sunday's matchup with the Jets will be even more telling, as Las Vegas has a better roster than the Jets. They arguably have a better coaching staff. It is hard to say a rebuilding Raiders team 'should' beat any team. However, the Jets would certainly qualify as one of those teams.

Making Changes

Yet that will not happen unless Las Vegas makes considerable changes heading into Sunday, even if the Raiders are only playing the Jets. Any team in the league can beat an unfocused and unprepared Raiders team. The Raiders have several areas they must improve in.

“I think there’s always things that we’re all going to try to do better. I think Kirk [Cousins] is one of his toughest critics on himself, so he always is trying to find ways to elevate the people around him, whether it’s us as coaches; we’re always trying to uplift each other, and then he is trying to find the best way to be successful,” Raiders offensive coordinator Andrew Janocko said earlier this week.

“So, he wants the best for his teammates and the best for everybody around him. So, whether it’s Jalen [Nailor], whether it’s Brock [Bowers], Mike [Mayer], everybody, he’s trying to bring out the best in everybody.”

Las Vegas' offensive line must block better, especially when run-blocking. The Raiders' receivers can get open more, even though Nailor and Tre Tucker have statistically created separation that ranks near the top of the league compared to other receivers.

Las Vegas' defense must stop the run and stop the big plays. They haven't done so successfully since their last win, back in Week 3. The Raiders' defense needs to get off the field better than they do on third downs, just as much as the Raiders' offense must sustain drives.

One of the more frustrating parts of the Raiders' four straight losses is the striking similarities between nearly all of them. The Raiders have lost two of their four games in what some believe were close games. They lost the other two in blowout fashion.

Even in their three wins, they looked like three different versions of themselves, each pulling off a thrilling late-game win. All seven games showed various versions of this year's Raiders team, which makes me uneasy heading into their Week 8 slate against the Jets.

Confidence Meter: Somewhat confident. Several factors do not bode well for the Raiders. Sunday will come down to which Raiders team shows up and how many quarters it takes for its offense to get going. Nonetheless, it's a winnable game for a Raiders team that needs one.