Chuck and Stuff
Lane Kiffin isn’t fired.
James Lofton is hired.
Lane loves Rob, Al loves Lane, and Amy loves everyone.
Jarrod Cooper has a big heart for dogs.
Tyler Brayton is officially a free agent—calming my worries that we might franchise him.
Justin Fargas has signed.
Nnamdi’s getting tagged.
Former Raiders quarterback Josh Booty got Tasered.
Have I missed anything?
Oh, yeah: PantyRaider is back. And if you don’t know what that means, then you need to come around here more often.
It’s been relatively slow going on Raiders news recently, and perhaps no big news is good news, because the last time we had “big news,” it was of dubious detail, and only served to deliver an alarming spike in our collective blood pressure.
Meanwhile, over in Miami: “In the Dolphins’ first major player purge since Parcells took charge of Miami’s football operations, the team parted ways with Trent Green, wide receiver Marty Booker, defensive tackle Keith Traylor, right tackle L.J. Shelton and five other players—ushering in the start of what
Say what you will about the Dolphins, but they’re sending their fans pretty strong signals of change, top to bottom. None of this “everyone gets a fresh start.” None of this “wait and see.” They aren’t remodeling. They’re razing the house and rebuilding an entirely new culture, from the executive offices through the locker room.
It’s a little late for that in
I don’t point this out to be pessimistic, but rather just to be realistic, and to heckle those who say that swift, decisive and wholesale change can’t be telegraphed immediately following the end of a dreadful season.
Thankfully, we are undergoing our own form of overhaul under Lane Kiffin. Slowly but surely, the tide is being turned, the scholarships are being terminated, and aromas of mint are in the air.
Stopping the run and catching the ball are, in my opinion, our top concerns at the moment. Here we have our cannon loaded with Jamarcus Russell, but no one deep to catch the cannonball.
As for stopping the run, the defensive line is only part of the problem, which goes as deep as the safety position, if not deeper. On Sirius radio the other day, Daryl Johnston was talking about watching the tape from the Raiders-Vikings game last year, and remarking about our defense’s dreadful fundamentals and tackling. He wasn’t saying it in the manner of someone who had an axe to grind, but more like someone who’d happened upon a train wreck and had to tell some friends about it. I remember that game, and he’s right. Rob Ryan, you may not have a roster of Pro Bowlers at your disposal, but it’s your responsibility to ensure that basic fundamentals are respected and applied.
It comes down to “chuck and stuff.” Chuck the ball, stuff the run. These aren’t the sum total of our needs, but they are at the top of my list. At some point you have to triage and prioritize. We can't count on the draft or free agency. We need to work these needs hard through the draft and free agency. We need to be active, aggressive and focused, and I think we will be. Here we go again, because the future is now.
posted by Raider Take at 10:17 AM
253 Comments:
Happy Valentines Day!!
glad to see no one cares(besides us) that the patriots have actually been filming since 2000, luckily everyone is wrapped up in the Clemens deal and they are to busy to point out that Goodell first told us that it only went back to 2006, just one of what i believe to be many lies concerning this. Goodell is looking more and more like Officer Barbrady from South Park "Move along people nothing to see here, move along"
im glad to see Fargas to be rewarded for his team first attitude, i worry about injuries with him, but im glad to see us reward a team guy who actually deserves it for a change.
ekgraider
Great take, Take.
Psycho
We didn't make any significant changes last off season? Huh? We turned over more of our roster than any team in the league, replace our entire offensive coaching staff (in addition to the HC), and changed over many in the front office. In fact, last off season we resembled Miami in this off season. My how quickly people can forget things after going 4-12.
If Miami only manages 4-12 this year will you talk about how they really didn't do anything to change their fortunes?
Other than that, great take, as usual.
H said...
Couldn't agree more on most points. However, in the Dolphin's case Parcells was moving from an NFL analyst job as opposed to a college coordinator's job.
Not an excuse for what happened, it's just that Parcells definitely had a leg up going in. He watched Miami every week along with 31 other teams. He knows as much about every coach and player in the league as anyone.
I'm with you on the tackling. What I will never understand is how a player could make it this far and still be a poor tackler.
Now, if Miami starts slow, what's the over/under on how long before the media starts talking about Parcells coming down from the owners suite to take over the coaching?
H
Well, Blanda, I don't want to rekindle any bad blood here, but there's no question that the Dolphins have been much more swift and decisive in the wake of their 1-15 year than we were in the wake of our 2-14 year.
Lane Kiffin was hired on January 23 last year. The Dolphins already had a new VP of football operations, a new GM and a new coach well in place by January 23 of this year. Player cuts were not nearly as deep and swift as what we're seeing in Miami. We still don't have a GM, save for Al Davis. We do still have our same defensive coordinator.
And if the Dolphins go 4-12, I will applaud them for getting to 4-12 in a manner that really bodes well for establishing a strong foundation and a new culture.
I wish I could be like you and feel that the Raiders have been equally aggressive about changing a culture of losing. My heart would like to go there, but my head won't let me.
But I'm ready to move on, and embrace change and progress in whatever form it comes, and I'm excited about what lies ahead.
Take, it's just that your current disappointment (actually now I can't tell if you're disappointed or excited) isn't reflected in your "minty fresh" posts from last off season. There was nothing, however, that the Raiders did last off season that would cause me to believe that the media would approach the team any differently.
On a different note, the news from yesterday pretty much confirms that the Pasties cheated in every one of Billicheats Super Bowls. Not too big a problem for Goodell, since he fully accepted the "I didn't know it was against the rules" defense.
Goodell also states that it was the league who blew the whistle on the Pasties. Eh, not so fast. I have this problem where I remember things. Like, for instance, I remember that the Pasties got caught because a Jets assistant coach saw their guy filming and called the stadium security. Then security had the cameraman play the tape in the booth to see what he was filming. It is at that point that the league was called, simultaneously as word got out in the press.
But Goodell says he has nothing to hide, and he'd destroy the tapes again. Spector says, however, that when you have an admission and the evidence, you keep the evidence. Goodell says that the tapes might leak out to the various teams. I guess he's never heard of safes.
this is just my opinion, obviously. i would be working toward this goal.
possibility moves we could be waiting to make:
signing booker at receiver, and letting porter walk. then trading for chad johnson june 1st or after, putting curry back at #3.
we need to sign hayneworth, leaving us the possibility to also cut turd sands, and drafting soh, sedric ellis, glenn dorsey, or jake long.
or we can skip booker altogether and draft mario manningham, and still trade for chad johnson; who isn't going anywhere until june 1st because the bengals lose $8 million in the cap if they move him before.
i'm concerned that we aren't making any moves yet, but maybe we have a plan in place to make the moves when the moving becomes available. just a thought.
another thought, the dolphins are stupid.
I was excited about signing Randy Moss, too. Should I then just stick to the position that Randy Moss was great for the Raiders, despite all evidence to the contrary? Same goes for last year. I was feeling minty fresh. But in retrospect, I see that it would have been better to cut more losses sooner, and to import more experienced executive authority. If I'd known what I know now, I might not have been so minty. I'd rather be accurate than consistent.
And yes, I was sorely disappointed with 4-12, and especially the manner in which we ended the season with some severe butt kickings. Just like Lane Kiffin.
I'm feeling pretty good about 2008. I'm not going to say I fell like an Altoid. But maybe some spearmint gum. Time heals wounds. Spring brings hope.
Good points RT, but a couple of additions. Why isn't the media slamming on the Dolphins for cutting Green & Booker afer getting them so recently? Wouldn't the Raiders be slammed for doing the same thing? Shouldn't there be a clamor for change at the top, now that the Dolphis are going on their 3rd coach in 3 years, 4th in the last 5? If you chew on that a bit, maybe the perspective changes . . .
I think it's great that they have a new staff in place, but that's the benefit of getting Parcells. He gets carte blanche, has a definite system in place, and has people in the league that understand it. That's a far cry from how Kiffin came into the league. Are the hirings of Cable, Knapp, Rathman, etc any less impressive, or do they have less of an impact, because they happened a bit later in the offseason? I think not - it's obviously more important to get the right people. I do think Parcells is an anomaly - just look at how long it has taken some other teams to put staffs together this offseason.
As for the cuts, I would like to see Jordan, Stu, etc, gone as much as the next guy. However, if you can get a 4th for Jordan, a 6th for Stu, etc, why not hang on to them until the draft? It might make us feel better to see some action, but if the response to Brayton is any indication, maybe not. I'll reserve my optimism / pessimism until we get to training camp . . . but god, I do hope they get a front 7 that can TACKLE!
I'm optomistic, but perhaps only for the sake of wishful thinking. I really can't say I feel strongly that "all is well" between Davis and Kiffin, SOB and Kiffin, and that these critical individuals are on the same page heading into free agency, the draft and the 2008 season.
The advantage the Dolphins have is that one man is in charge. Arguably, the disadvantage that we have is that one man is in charge.
That's true. Miami now has one man in charge. Will he make the draft picks, forcing them on his new coach? Will he make the decisions regarding who gets cut and who stays? There's a reason that Bill Parcells, a great admirer of Al Davis, has never worked for Al Davis. Same with Denny Green.
Parcells has had great success in most places he's gone. But on the other hand, we've never seen Parcells take over a franchise that was having success. He has a long career of rebuilding failures. Davis, on the other hand, has a strong record in rebuilding his own failures (admittedly a little rocky since Callahan ran the Raider ship onto the rocks).
Wherever Parcells goes, he runs his ship the same way. The success is acknowledged, but he's never really been someplace long enough where we witness the ebbing and flowing of the tides. I view Parcells and Davis very similarly. While folks here might take exception to that, I know that Parcells would consider it quite a compliment.
Currently, the Raiders are doing what they normally do doing their successful times, and they've lowered the (as Jerry McDonald puts it) Maxwell Smart Cone of Silence. Three of the last four years focused on the hiring of a new HC, and the changes that each brought about. In the remaining year, we were revelling in the acquisitions of Moss and Jordan. Each of the four years was a failure.
I believe it is Kiffin who has brought back the Cone of Silence. In view of his reluctance to even name his starting QB each week, that makes sense to me.
Over the past several weeks we've seen the media unload stories with very little in the way of facts to support anything they've said. In fact, the facts repeatedly seem to fall in the opposite direction. We were told that Davis had rescinded all Kiffin involvement in the hiring of staff and personnel, and yet Kiffin interviewed replacements for two of his coaches, and they were hired. We were told that Kiffin really wanted to fire Ryan even though he never said that or even implied it.
And yet we have hand wringing, wondering just how damaged the Kiffin/Davis relationship is.
Well (and don't say this is a claim that Al never makes a mistake), I trust Al to build another winner. Just as I'd trust Parcells to build another winner. Green, eh, not so much...
Now THIS is simply a MUST READ!!!!
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/patriots_season_perfect_for_rest
crap...
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/patriots
_season_perfect_for_rest
With the re-signing of Fargas, yesterday, a WR signing went under the radar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Watkins
We picked up Todd Watkins off waivers from Atlanta. At one time in his college career, Watkins was called the best deep threat in the nation. He's 6'3" and can bench press 326 pounds (in other words he can bench press Warren Sapp), and he has 4.26 speed.
However, in college and in the pros, he's had some trouble with with short precise routs, and hasn't been able to get open (at least in practices - he's had no NFL playing time as yet). This could be James Jett on the cheap, or it could be that Kiffin remembers something about Watkins from his USC days, and sees something others don't.
Or, he's Mike Williams with speed. I wouldn't get too excited.
Don't worry, nyraider. They didn't franchise tag him, they only claimed him off waivers. He didn't cost us anything and won't unless he makes the team.
Last year we were all campaynning for SOB to be our new head coach...What a differance a year makes...So why did he fall so far so rapidly and his "D" with him...
Speculation...DaPowerStrugle is still going...But would SOB take a fall just to undermine Kiffen in order to replace him when he just makes himself look bad...
Most Likely...SOB just got exposed and as Al said in "06" the "D" played well but not great...So it appears the "Old-Man" knew more about football and his coaches and team than the rest of us...Retro-Looking back and remembering what Al said is a good thing...He has not given up on SOB even though most of us have -n- he has not given up on his new leader who will bring the Raiders back to glory....(Kiffen)...
So I am not "MintyFresh" and I am NOT in "DaDumper"....I am "Wait-n-See" at this point...
There are tons of posibilities on the horizon....and another failure starring us in the face....
PantyRaider...RaiderFansStandTuff!!!
Blanda- I'll give you that one. Very funny.
I was reading the wikipedia link you provided, and this guy is a regular jekyll and hyde at WR. One minute he's lighting up the score board, the next he's dropping rountine passes. Kiffin will either whip him into to shape or he'll be trading bubble gum cards with Mike Williams.
Depending on which player shows up, he seems capable of being a deep threat... something we don't have but desparately need to go with a QB that can throw 70 yards on one knee.
PantyRaider- very wise perspective. I'm in a wait and see mode myself.
KeepinDaFingersCrossed!
RT... there is one blatant thing you are ignoring in your comparison to Miami this year, and the Raiders of last year. Miami stunk out loud on both sides of the ball, and the Raiders had the 3rd ranked defense in the NFL... thus they thought that there were more things in place (I know, I know, there was a REASON why they were deceivingly ranked that high, which I agree with, but that is only 20/20 hindsite again).
This is why we kept every starter and the defensive coaching staff in place two years ago. Miami pretty much had to start over from scratch this year... a completely different situation.
The biggest change most of us wanted this season is SOB fired... which might have happened if Kiffin and Al weren't in some sort of convoluted childish pissing contest... they are BOTH to blame, IMO.
Its too early to judge any other changes.
---gary
Gary, all fair points.
My only quibble would be that 20/20 hindsight is a luxury afforded to fans, not owners and executives. We don't get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to get these things right.
One of the reason the fans overestimated our defense is because those who should know better overestimated our defense.
Fans and executives don't share equal responsibility for organizational blunders.
If our execs had been paying closer attention, they might have come to the same conclusion as Miami, that we stunk on both sides of the ball. When you only win two games, that's not a stretch.
I don't know RT... unless one of those wins was completely at the hands of the D... Pittsburgh.
On the other hand, how many 4th Qtr collapses does it take to realize something's not quite right? That became even more evident this year, yet here we are waiting to see if any change will be implemented on D.
I still have nightmares about our entire D line dropping back into coverage against Cleveland on that critical game-ending drive. Not sure I'll ever get over that one. Kiffin probably wanted to fire Ryan on the spot. I would have.
Gary said- "The biggest change most of us wanted this season is SOB fired... which might have happened if Kiffin and Al weren't in some sort of convoluted childish pissing contest... they are BOTH to blame, IMO."
Gary, IMO too. It almost sounds like you're bellyaching. Welcome to the club!
NY... I've always been part of the club... the thing I am pointing out (repeatedly) is BALANCE.
And btw... speaking of which... this article is going to give the "IAAFers" and especially the "Grudenites" a HEART ATTACK!
http://tinyurl.com/ysz3nz
It's the best article I have read about why the Raiders fall from grace was so sudden and permanent... Gruden and Allen built their winning foundation on the sand of last gasp veterans and buried us up to our necks in it by extending so many contracts instead of using part of the money on building for the future (it mentioned we were still paying on GANNONS contract this past year.
A must read for any Raider fan, IMO.
---Gary
>>>
On the other hand, how many 4th Qtr collapses does it take to realize something's not quite right?
>>>>
Actually, from what I remember, the defense from two years ago rose to the occasion fairly routinely in holding the opponents offense late in the game (especially in short fields) the problem was, the offense was so pathetic, it didn't make any difference that the defense kept them in the game. If this years defense did as well, we coulda had 4 extra wins easily.
Kinda hard to predict that would happen, especially with nearly the entire defense still intact.
From the article:
The easy cop out is to blame Al, as he is the one who is most responsible for player acquisition. Jon Gruden also was big on that philosophy, as was Bruce Allen. (more on him in a moment.) To show that it was not just Al, but Gruden’s inability to develop younger players, just take a look at the Tampa Bay Buccaneers under Gruden. It took him bringing in Jeff Garcia to fill the role of Rich Gannon and get the Bucs back in the playoffs.
Gruden and Al had a synergy in their love of giving aging vets their one last shot. It worked for the short term, but left the Raiders with a rotting core. The aging vets aged out together in 03 and Gannon had his career ended in 04, and no one was left waiting in the wings. True, Davis tried adding pieces to the puzzle, but there was no foundation and without a foundation, even the greatest skyscraper will come tumbling down.
---Gary
H said...
Gary,
You beat me to it this time. I think Blanda will agree, the article makes virtually the same points he and I have made the past several months about the Gruden era.
Now, it still won't convince most of the Davis Dumpers, but it does add more fodder for discussion here.
Here is a quote from the article that backs up the cap problems, "The Raiders had dead money from Gannon’s contract on the books until last year."
Actually, it's an opinion piece as opposed to an article, but it makes the comparison of Garcia/Gannon which I made last fall, and the problems with developing players for the future, which Blanda and I made last fall also.
I don't know Blanda, maybe Patrick Patterson is as old as us.
H
we have more cap room this year, and more money to spend because of the penny pinching from last season.
as pointed out by gary, the difference between kiffin and gruden is youth. we finally have been relieved of the salaries of gannon, barret robbins, mo collins, and t-wheat (all of whom were still under contract when they were injured and retired).
so i expect to make some balanced moves. we will get young players, with a balance of a few veterans to fill some voids. here's what i expect:
cuts/loss to fa: jordan, schweigert, sims (still on the roster), turd-ell sands, brayton, porter, jake grove, culpepper (still on roster), andrew walter, fabian washington, reshard lee, and fred wakefield.
signings: namdi, haynesworth, andre davis, max starks or nat dorsey.
trade: chad johnson
draft: soh, jake long, or sedric ellis.
RT-
Think you have it right only I would have written "stuff and chuck" just because the D needs seem much more compelling as far as winning goes, i.e., stop the run and tackle better. Long would have a huge impact in that he plays the run equally well as the pass...Ellis and Dorsey can clog the middle, which is helpful, but do nothing to solve the problem at RDE. There are no safeties who can support the run worth a shot in the first two rounds, so unless Lane has his eye on a reserve on someone's roster or has a mid-round prospect in mind, it's gonna be the Mike and Stu show again in 2008 [all the more reason to get in position to grab SOH]. LT is a position of need and Jake Long is a real possibility if SOH is gone... because DT is deep and we can get someone like Trevor Laws in Rd 2. Jake Long and Trevor Laws 1-2 is not bad, though it leaves Kelly/Richardson as RDE. If Porter comes back I'm not sure we wouldn't be just fine with the same WR corps given the emergence of Miller and more experience for Russell. If Porter leaves, there's WR options in FA and later in the draft---WR is not a concern to me because Russell will get better and we run the ball very well. Stuff and Chuck!
Gary's thoughts:
H, it was an interesting experiment... completely ignoring youthful players while picking up every quality veteran player available (and keeping every quality veteran player on roster at all costs). They damn near pulled it off! They were one Siragusa body dive from one ring, and Gruden himself from another. But the problem is that there was repercussions to it. I don't think it's a coincidence that this year will be the first time we have any substantial cap space since Gruden arrived.
This model is also completely opposite to the Bellichick model... where he keeps just a few key veterans on both sides of the ball and surrounds them with youngsters.
It's a much more cap friendly model because veterans come at such a huge cost.
And now for BALANCE... if Al hadn't drafted so horribly all along, the repercussions wouldn't have been so bad. It was particularly a huge mistake to keep trying to rely on veteran scrap heap QB's after Gannon went down, instead of going after a blue chip QB to build for the future... most of the blue chippers we coulda had turned out pretty good. The same year we got Gallery, there are now TWO QB's we coulda drafted that own rings.
Oh well... it seems Al has learned from the all-veteran mortgage-the-future gamble... and we should have a good mix of youth and veterans next year... and if JRuss turns to gold... much of this 5 year nightmare will be a distant memory. Much like most of the 90's right before Gruden arrived.
I think Kiffin knows what he has here... which is why he didn't just bolt when him and Al got into the insane pissing contest.
---Gary
H said...
He's an 11 year veteran, but it might be worthwhile to bring in Zack Thomas for a season or two to show our linebackers how to play the run.
Or, at least, get him on the roster and see what he looks like in camp. He difinitely knows how to tackle, but does he have anything left in the tank?
He was out when we play the fish last season.
H
Somewhere out there on the the grassy knoll, Bruce Allen hired Tom Walsh and signed Randy Moss.
Gary said...
"It's the best article I have read about why the Raiders fall from grace was so sudden and permanent... Gruden and Allen built their winning foundation on the sand of last gasp veterans and buried us up to our necks in it by extending so many contracts instead of using part of the money on building for the future (it mentioned we were still paying on GANNONS contract this past year."
Wow, that sounds familiar to me too, H. Wonder why nobody thought of that around here?
Also remember that Gruden, and then Callahan, seemed to have a problem giving playing time to the draftees. Both Porter and Curry had their development put on hold so Rice and Brown could get maximum playing time.
It created another problem as well that affected the team "attitude." With all those aging players, Gruden and Callihan dumped the work ethic. In camp, the aging veterans were given plenty of off days (where they didn't have to practice OR work with the new blood on their techniques).
They got away with that for awhile because of the insane work ethic of Rich Gannon, who was always on the field driving teammates. When Gannon went down, the party was over. The lost work ethic was firmly entrenched by the time Turner showed up. Turner lacked the leadership to change anything.
When Shell got here, he tried to change that culture, but was too out of touch with the current generation to inspire anything but antagonism. Shell tried to be the "tough guy" and everyone just shut down.
What I like about Kiffin, so far, is his ability to communicate with players, and his quiet authority. He voices his simple ethic. "Improvement, hard work, doing what is asked of you will gain you playing time. Lack of effort will first get you benched, and next get you cut."
Also, remember that Davis specifically said when he hired Kiffin that Kiffin would bring knowledge about college players and the younger players in the league. Davis understood the problem.
And until I see some sign of it, the Davis/Kiffin turmoil never happened outside a Timmy Kawakami wet dream. There has been absolutely no indication from the team that the problem ever existed, or anything that BSPN or others reported had any basis in reality.
Zach Thomas is cooked and he plays the same position as Morrison
Yes, RT, your point is clear. Tom Walsh, who we know was actually hired by Art Shell ("because he knows what I want"), was the problem with 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007, because he was the Raiders' OC for 9 games in 2006.
Tom Walsh and Art Shell, neither of whom were hired by Bruce Allen, were a huge part of the problem in 2006, which created major setbacks for 2007. As for 2004 and 2005, Norv Turner, Randy Moss and poor drafts were among the major issues for which Bruce and Jon were not responsible.
Those two may have created some lingering issues, but there's no way they're most responsible, in their own absence no less, for one of the worst five-year runs in the modern era of the NFL.
>>>>
Somewhere out there on the the grassy knoll, Bruce Allen hired Tom Walsh and signed Randy Moss.
>>>>
The Great Moss Gamble might have worked if we had a whole boat load of grizzled veterans so we coulda had a great team around him, but we didn't have the cap-room to do it, for one, and also, there weren't any veteran QB's worth a shit.
I think maybe the point should be that with Gruden/Allen/Al we had a perfect storm in a coach that would do anything to win NOW, a owner with the same attitude, and a GM that would manipulate the salary cap to make it happen.
I think Gruden tried to do the same thing in TB (remember all the last leg Raiders he kept bringing in early after his SB?) but quickly learned his lesson. The current Gruden/Allen TB team is now looking pretty young (which ironically is what Al is also doing).
Once again... it was a worth gamble... we almost pulled it off!!! But to pretend the veteran-only cap model didn't have later percussions is disingenuous.
Veterans come at a steeper price. Somehow you have to pay the piper... it's simple economics.
---gary
>>>
Those two may have created some lingering issues, but there's no way they're most responsible, in their own absence no less, for one of the worst five-year runs in the modern era of the NFL.
>>>>
They might not have been much responsible for the last two of it, but they sure as FUCK were directly responsible for the first three.
Most of the young players that would have helped the defense were CUT as cap casualties. Imagine what we coulda done with Barton, Rod Coleman, CWood, and Tory James (ok, not young, but he was a cap casualty) anchoring our defense the last five years? All those CB's we were drafting coulda went to other needs... and we woulda had an anchor DT all along.
---gary
H said...
Take,
I never wanted Moss, thought whoever did it Al, Norv or both was completely wrong. That was a dumb move from the getgo.
lk,
Al that is true, but I'm only suggesting they take a look. Someone needs to teach the linebackers how to play the run better.
Gary,
That's "alleged" pissing contest. The Raiders have neither confirmed nor denied the occurance of said pissing contest.
Blanda,
I think the guy was reading our post and just waiting long enough so it would seem like he did it on his own.
H
I think the bottom line is that the Raiders problems started the same year they were reportedly THIRTY FIVE million over the salary cap.
It was Al's fault for not blowing up the team at that point, and Al's/Gruden's/Allens fault that they got to that point in the first place.
The first three years of failure were all at the mercy of the salary cap... what happened the last two years were at the feet of Al... and I assert the last year was the light at the end of the tunnel.
H, I think there is too much circumstantial evidence to deny there wasn't some sort of pissing contest between Kiffin and Al.
---gary
H, I actually saw somebody write an article about what Gruden and Allen were doing while they were still here, and the article said the chickens would come home to roost. Damn, I wish I could remember who wrote that.
At the time, it seemed very logical to me but I chose to look the other way because the Raiders were doing well. I said to myself that Davis would figure out a way past it, but he didn't. And I specifically remember that the guy who wrote the article said that it would eventually cost the Raiders about five years to a decade dwelling in the cellar.
Double damn, I wish I could remember who wrote it. Obviously it wasn't one of the usual suspects. Whoever it was was likely run out of the business for making sense.
Before we all get hurt in a hail of F-bombs, how about tackling the issue of stopping the run, pun intended?
We've got arterial bleeding in this area, and we need some serious medical attention.
Hopefully we will find three or four new starters who can help fill the ability void, but what to do about this persistent lack of fundamentals with our existing players?
Are our guys just incapable of fundamentals, despite being deemed talented enough to start in the NFL, and/or do we have a serious coaching problem on that side of the ball?
Take, good question. Fundamental football has been on the decline in Oakland since Callahan's second year. Personnally, I think lax camps contributed to that, and those continued through Turner. Shell tried to change it, but I think since Shell/Walsh were taking all the heat, the players just stopped trying. At least that's true on the offense. The players on the d side of the ball were getting respect, so they had to defend that respect - but then falling off again in 2007.
That said, we weren't always horrible last season. There were moments when the defense played smart, heads up football and covered their assignments well. As soon as they'd do it right in one game, the next game they'd get cocky and we were back to same old schtick. So, fairly, the question isn't any longer whether they can master fundamentals, the question is can they be consistant in the use of fundamentals.
I'm never sure about the answers to such questions. Generally both good and bad habits feed off the habits of others. I think the only way you counter it is to remove each player who fails to clean up his act until the others fall in line.
The personnel moves made by the Raiders this season will likely be the most important moves they have ever, or will ever make. This season will either mark the re-birth of the Raider Nation or be the moment when they reach the bottom of the sand pit, unable to climb out for a decade or more.
Now those are raised stakes! Can you handle it? I, for one, like living on the edge. This coming season could prove to be the most exciting ever, or be the thing that finally causes us to spend lots of time with our significant others. For every kick off in '08, think of that.
There's some potential in the cuts today by Atlanta.
Leftwich would make a good #3 QB, and we can trade Walter.
Wayne Gandy could provide some life at LT.
And our old friend Rod Coleman is now available. We let him go because we were switching to a 3-4 and he certainly isn't a nose tackle. But as I remember it, he sure can collapse a pocket.
"I actually saw somebody write an article about what Gruden and Allen were doing while they were still here, and the article said the chickens would come home to roost"
My only edit to the statement would be to make it ... "I actually saw somebody write an article about what Davis, Gruden and Allen were doing"
Al Davis willingly rolled the dice for a SB with aging veterans. To think that Gruden/Allen pushed this upon Davis is laughable.
It is unfortunate that year 1 of the rebuilding phase had a 5 year delay ... perhaps the gardener was pruning & trimming the grassy knoll. :}
RT-
Let's look at this by each level of the D:
D line: rarely have to tackle in space so can't say we have a tackling problem here. We have a definite skill problem at RDE.
Linebackers: Morrison and Howard are both above average tacklers. Our Sam LBs are not at the same talent level but are not bad tacklers.
Secondary: At the corners we have above average talent and all can tackle. At safety, Huff is a good tackler in space but gets run over in run support; Stu takes bad angles in space and is late in run support; Eugene--jury is still out.
Often in the secondary big plays are given up because someone is out of position.
So, my take is we have a tackling problem only at safety, which is probably best attributed to personnel, but also may have a defensive backfield coaching issue from so many big plays...
In 2007, we were dead last in the AFC in yards allowed per rushing attempt (4.8!). We were next to dead last in average rushing yards allowed per game in the AFC, with only the Dolphins allowing more. We gave up six more rushing touchdowns than any other team in the AFC (24 total, the Dolphins gave up the second most with 18).
It may not be purely a tackling problem, but it's surely a stopping problem, and I've got to think it goes deeper than safety, although our safeties are definitely part of the problem.
RT asked: "Are our guys just incapable of fundamentals, despite being deemed talented enough to start in the NFL, and/or do we have a serious coaching problem on that side of the ball?"
If we go by what Rob Ryan, Warren Sapp, and some other defensive players said through this past season of "If we keep in our gaps, we wouldn't have this problem," I'm leaning that this is a player problem. I don't think it is an incapability problem; I think it is a discipline problem with young players shooting their gap trying to make a big play; but the big play they are making is for the other team.
We have a lot of young players in key defensive positions (DE, LB, S, CB). I given an example about a young DE for a high school team shooting his gap, causing a blocker to go one-on-one against a linebacker for a big running play. The reason? The DE thought he'd make a better play by going inside the gap, instead of staying to the outside. When the problem was pointed out, he was benched, and the team lost by the 2 TD's that stemmed from him doing that.
Could be the same thing the Raiders are facing, and we just need to sit them out, until they can follow instructions; or cut these players, and replace them with people who will follow instructions.
No doubt we have a stopping problem, RT. Both our current DEs are light and can be run at and we can't support the run at the safety position [how many tackles did Rodney Harrision make in the SB, like 11, and NEs LBs are old]. A playmaking, sure tackling SS is the key to run support. When you add our weakness there to the DL problems you get the performance we put out there...but, more along your lines of thinking, if our coaches were that good, shouldn't we have gotten a better defensive performance?
I'm confused, Calico. Explain. What I'm hearing from you is if you make the argument that Davis, Gruden, and Allen built for the quick Super Bowl while neglecting the future and the team's foundation, it's a looney conspiracy theory. But IAAF is perfectly reasonable, and nothing more needs to be said. I just love that kind of careful analysis.
What's the acronym for "it's not all Al's fault, but as the owner and chief executive of the organization who controls hirings and signings, even he, unlike some folks, would probably man up to take the brunt of responsibility for the epic mess that that Raiders got themselves into, and who should understand that change is the surest path toward change?"
RT, you seem to off on your own tangent and not responding to any body's comment. Read the list again - "Davis, Gruden and Allen..."
Sorry, but if I take Gruden and Allen off that list, IAAF. You and Calico tell me that by leaving them on it, I'm peddling grassy knoll conspiracy theories.
So, Take, what you're telling me is that it's not IAAF, but It's All Al's Fault!
That "list" is Calico Jack's, not yours. He added Al to the list after you left him off of it.
The pearl is in the river. Don't tell anyone.
all that glitters isn't gold.
again, we are not saying iaaf, but we are giving him credit where credit is due.
Well, Take, one has to presume that Al always has something to do with it since, as you say, he's the one who hired Gruden and Allen.
I defy you to find me one instance where I have ever made the claim that Al bears no fault in any of this. But you seem to love setting up strawmen.
The arguments that H, Gary, and I have doing battle with are the ones who seem to claim that anybody that Al hires is just there as window dressing. They don't actually do anything or encourage Al to do anything. Al just pulls their strings.
To say I'm blaming Gruden and Allen, and not even considering Al is a cute little strawman, but it doesn't actually relate to anything I've ever said.
Well, I'm sorry, like Calico Jack, I misunderstood your statement that "I actually saw somebody write an article about what Gruden and Allen were doing while they were still here, and the article said the chickens would come home to roost."
That's not a straw man. It's merely a reading.
I don't think any of us are saying that it's all Al's fault, or that none of it is Al's fault. We just have different opinions about who is most responsible for our plight, and upon whom the biggest burden of change should fall.
P.S. If you every start a company, please make me your CEO. When the company crashes, we could have a lot of fun blaming the people I hired, and to whom I delegated decisions before signing off on them.
Let's look at it this way. Al Davis has a long history of bring in an aging superstar every few years. It's always somebody who, according to the rest of the league, has nothing left in the tank. Then that player typically winds up goint into the hall, and Al claims him as a Raider.
But never in Al's history, except when the Raiders had Gruden as HC and Allen as the cap specialist, has he employed such a veteran at about 80% of the skill positions.
Following Gruden and Allen to TB, they spent several years bringing in young players who most of the league thought would be, at the very least, good bets (people like Chris Sims for instance). Under Gruden those younger players failed to develope, and the Bucs couldn't even contend to get into the post season. Last year TB went back to signing aged veterans, and they were back in the playoffs.
This just might lead one to conclude that Gruden has trouble developing talent, and prefers older veterans with their positive habits already intact. It might lead a reasoning person to conclude that Gruden and Allen had a lot to do with the team foundation when they were in Oakland. A reasoning person would not conclude that Davis had no knowledge of what was happening, nor would he conclude that Davis didn't support what was happening.
As for myself, I believe that each coach and executive Al hires have a great deal of input into which moves Al makes. That's why he hires them - for their input. He doesn't hire them because they go nicely with the carpet.
Putting all of this together, one might reasonably conclude that Al, Gruden and Allen all had something to do with the destruction of the team foundation. Further, Gruden and Allen don't have to worry about it because they've moved on. The man who does have to worry about it apparently is. Which is why he has said that one of the reasons he's hired Kiffin is because of Kiffin's knowledge of youth.
All of this, of course, is tin foil hat stuff. A reasoning person just says, IAAF.
jake grove, andrew walter, fabian washington.....Young players who may not have had enough exposure to trully know their value...Yet...Just as in the case of Nandi -n- Fargas....some young players take more time to develop and the right coaches to bring it out...or in the case of Tylar....too much time spent on a player who did not develop....
Perplexing Question....who do we keep and who do we replace....Change without reasoning will just dig a deeper hole that we can never climb out of....
"D"....We need veteran help here....I am very reluctant to spend another 1st rd pick on a squad that does not produce consistantly...I do not believe 1-2 players will turn this side of the ball around in "08"...We need movement but it needs to be ballanced....2 key veterans and 2-3 young players to develop....But don't scrap a secondary who were at times at the top of the league in Pass "D" in "07"....We should go "D" with our 2nd rd pick....
1st rd we should go "Skill Position" "O"....but it appears the only "Skill Position" player worth the 3-4 pick is at "RB"....NOT a "WR" available worth the pick....
The "O" is on the verge of high production....the "OL" played well in the running game and pass blocked better than in "06"...Our failure was at the "QB" position where play was totally irratic and at "WR" where we had the same peoblem....So...If we were to add a highly talented "RB" along with M Bush -n- Fargas who we already have the Run game could become so powerful that most of the heat is taken off the "WR"s -n- "QB"....and the "Vertical Game" will open up for us...
What I am saying is that the very best way to help our "Helpless" "D" is to put a powerful "O" on the field that punishes the oposition..."Consistantly"...does NOT turn the ball over and scores points on every possetion....Now wouldn't that be something to dream about...."The Raiders of Old"....
The simple fact is our "D" is several players away from being "Dominate"....But the "O" could be much closer...
PantyRaider....Speculation!!!!
"P.S. If you every start a company, please make me your CEO. When the company crashes, we could have a lot of fun blaming the people I hired, and to whom I delegated decisions before signing off on them."
No. If I owned the company, I'd fire your ass. Just like Al would.
In the process, I'm sure you'd absolve yourself of responsibility for the company crashing.
PantyRaider is with me on the "chuck" part. Let's get some threats. They don't need to be superstars, just capable downfield receivers with good character.
Kiffin admitted that Higgins' growth and evaluation were stunted by our counterintuitive reliance on Williams-Dwight in the third slot during a rebuilding year. Hopefully we find out ASAP if he's going to cut it.
"In the process, I'm sure you'd absolve yourself of responsibility for the company crashing."
If it's my company, it's also my fortune. But it is my company, and it will be until I die or the company goes bankrupt. That, my friend, is a reality you're going to have to get used to. Al Davis isn't the CEO. He's the guy that hires, or doesn't hire the CEO.
I can just see your annual report: "Sure, we've posted dreadful losses for five consecutive years, but I own the majority, so it's my company dammit, and you have no right to complain, so just get used to it."
I left a post over at Calico's site saying that I think WR is going to be our problem child this year.
I think Kiffin will likely address the problems with stopping the run, and there are more than adequate tools out there for the cure. However, both the FA and DRAFT WR class this year is fairly weak. There are some viable #2s out there, but few (if any) viable #1s.
It's going to stick in Al's craw looking for a good trade possibility after giving up Moss for a #4, but I think we need to do it. However, the problem is that we don't have anything to trade for a #1 WR, unless we consider giving up 2009 draft picks.
It's looking very likely to me that our starters in 2008 will be Curry and Higgins. I hope Higgins is spending lots of time at Raiders HQ this off season. He better. JRuss needs somebody to throw to.
"O"....if it was productive the oposition would have to scrap part of their run game plan and throw the ball to play "Keep-Up"....if it were "Dominate" they would be playing "Catch-Up" and play into the streingth of our "D"....
"D"....Could look very productive -n- tough if it did not have to face so much running down our throats....or bad field position from "TO"s and a failed "O"....They could be much more aggressive if they did not have to worry about the score and the "O"s inability to put up points or give them a rest....
Please Al give us an "O"....
PantyRaider....SkillPosition!!!!!
It's not a problem. I don't have a publicly traded company, and the minority owners are "silent partners" who must either bow to my judgment or sell back their interest.
Glad to know you think so highly of your customers.
"WR" of AZ....Fitz....
What is the posibility that he get's out of town and we go after him....A. Walter is a home-town favorate in the "StickerPatch"...PortSter would look good in the NFCW...What else could we give then...a high 3rd rd pick...
PantyRaider....TradeBate!!!!
Here we go:
A lawsuit filed Friday by a former St. Louis Rams player and others seeks millions of dollars in damages from the alleged taping of Rams practices by the New England Patriots before the 2002 Super Bowl.
The Patriots won the game 20-17 in the Superdome.
The $100 million suit, filed on behalf of former Rams player Willie Gary in U.S. District Court in New Orleans, names the Patriots, team owner Robert Kraft and head coach Bill Belichick.
Yi-Pi!!!!
We a gona have a "Patsy" Fry...
Hang da Bastards....and "Good-All" "Burn da Tapes" Commisioner....
PantyRaider....JudgementCall!!!
SO...ya all talking about the leagal business so how about the "RaiderNation" get together and file a suit against the bastards for Gambling Losses and in-humane punishment...anguish...suffering as a result of the spying and eventual bad call (TUCK) that cost us and our beloved Raiders an opertunity to advance to the AFC Championship Game "2002"....
PantyRaider...Where do I sign!!!!
Raidertake,
don't you know, we cannot stop the run, or tackle because of bruce allen, and jon gruden.
wake up !!!!!!!!!
IAAF
>>>>>
The arguments that H, Gary, and I have doing battle with are the ones who seem to claim that anybody that Al hires is just there as window dressing.
>>>>
Well actually... most IAAFers said Gruden was completely responsible for everything that happened during our three year championship run... uhh... until now, of course.
---Gary
Personally, I've been very vocal about giving Mr. Davis his due for those great years, and have repeatedly debunked those who would suggest that Jon Gruden could take two teams to the Super Bowl in the same year. I have pointed out that Davis hired Gruden and, as a very hands-on owner, had a firm hand in the team's success.
For this same reason, I am giving Mr. Davis his due for the failures of the past five years.
That's why I'm neither an IAAFer nor an enabler. I'm not a fan of illogic.
Failure to give Mr. Davis the bulk of the responsibility for the organization's fortunes, good or bad, is where you will find your inconsistency.
BR: The reason I added Davis to Gruden & Allen for the mess were are in is simple. In your previous posts leading up to my response, you made many coherent, intelligent comments about how the Raiders mortgaged their future for a run at glory. I agree.
In these posts you went on endlessly about how it is Gruden/Allen's fault. There was no mention of Davis being equally if not more responsible as well. I know you will say that you give credit/blame to Davis but your posts gave the impression that Davis was innocently standing by idle while these decisions that impact the team were made.
Like RT, I try to make sense of what has happened to our beloved team. I try to give a balanced opinion. I'm definitely not a IAAFer BUT I also hold Davis accountable. Logically, since Davis is a hands on owner and we are in an epically bad 5 year swoon, the majority of blame falls back on him.
When we get out of this funk and turn things around, I will give the proper and just credit to Davis for making the right decisions to rebuild the team.
The analogy I would make is that the folks in the IAAF camp are reactionary conservatives and the folks in the INAF (It's Never Al's fault) are radical liberals. I consider myself an independent. I prefer concentrating on offering opinions of constructive resolutions to the problems instead of playing the blame game.
Precisely, Calico Jack.
On a similar note, I am taking aim here more at illogic, enabling and evasion than I am Mr. Davis.
If it sounds like I'm just harping on Mr. Davis for the sake of harping, that's not the case. I am just pointing out the obvious, mainly in response to those who so forcefully ignore the obvious. And the obvious, when you're sitting on one of the worst five-year runs in the modern history of the NFL, is never going to be pretty.
I would gladly drop this stuff if folks would quit advancing these outlandish excuses our plight.
Calico Jack,
why do you say the raiders mortgaged their future during the allen/gruden/ davis time ?
it's true that the team was loaded with high priced vets with a few last drops left in the tank.
but it's also true that the raiders had plenty of draft picks during the allen/gruden/davis era.
isn't the real problem that the raiders drafted poorly during that time, so that when the vets were spent, there was no talent, or next to no talent, to step in ?
in my view, it's poor drafting that has plagued the raiders, not a team of aging vets.
Next four years of first through third picks post Gruden:
2005
1. Fabian Washington, CB, Nebraska
2. Stanford Routt, CB, Houston
3a. Andrew Walter, QB, Arizona
2004
1. Robert Gallery, OT, Iowa
2. Jake Grove, C, Virginia Tech
3. Stuart Schweigert, S, Purdue
2003
1a. Nnamdi Asomugha, CB, California
1b. Tyler Brayton, DE, Colorado
2. Teyo Johnson, TE, Stanford
2002
1a. Phillip Buchanon, CB, Miami,
1b. Napoleon Harris, LB, Northwestern
2a. Langston Walker, OL, California
exactly my point raidertake.
and let's look at the drafts during the allen/davis/grud