Five Postgame Takes
1. You can talk all you want about execution, but the question is: why aren’t we executing? If your company’s sales drop 75% in a year, and the stock price takes a dive, do you simply blame the middle managers and secretaries for not executing? No, you begin at the executive level, which in this instance is the coaching level. It’s the executives who are responsible for hiring the right people, establishing the plan, adjusting where necessary, and making it work with the talent at hand. I hate to say it, but on the offensive side of the ball, it looks like we have an executive crisis.
2. The dismissal of the running game in the first half was truly astonishing, as was the abandonment of it in the second half. LaMont Jordan averaged seven yards per carry, yet was only handed the ball nine times. Justin Fargas, a proven beast, was handed the ball once. I dare anyone to come in here and offer a reasonable excuse for this scenario, in a game in which we never trailed by a large margin.
3. I didn’t like the call to punt with less than a yard to go on fourth down at the Seattle 49 yard line in the second quarter. After the punt, which was a touchback, we netted 29 yards. Defense is our strength, so pursue the first down and don’t get too precious about field position. Score some points. Go down swinging. What’s the worst that could happen? A shutout? Oops.
4. The broadcasters worked themselves into an embarrassing, and telling, froth over Tyler Brayton’s knee to Jerramy Stevens’ groin. They screamed for a suspension! They called it indicative of a team out of control! It was the worst thing since…Randy Moss fake mooned the cheeseheads! Western civilization was crumbling! Then they went to one of their own, Chris Mortensen, who just shrugged and said it might be worthy of a fine, but likely not a suspension. Clearly, Mortensen forgot to drink his Kool Aid. I’m not saying it was okay for Brayton to jam his knee into Stevens’ groin (I would have preferred a fist to Stevens’ melon), but it hardly merited the Chicken Little outcry.
5. So, where do we go from here? You tell me. I'm out of answers. There's no point in discussing our defense. Our defense is ready, willing and capable. It's all about the offense at this point.
2. The dismissal of the running game in the first half was truly astonishing, as was the abandonment of it in the second half. LaMont Jordan averaged seven yards per carry, yet was only handed the ball nine times. Justin Fargas, a proven beast, was handed the ball once. I dare anyone to come in here and offer a reasonable excuse for this scenario, in a game in which we never trailed by a large margin.
3. I didn’t like the call to punt with less than a yard to go on fourth down at the Seattle 49 yard line in the second quarter. After the punt, which was a touchback, we netted 29 yards. Defense is our strength, so pursue the first down and don’t get too precious about field position. Score some points. Go down swinging. What’s the worst that could happen? A shutout? Oops.
4. The broadcasters worked themselves into an embarrassing, and telling, froth over Tyler Brayton’s knee to Jerramy Stevens’ groin. They screamed for a suspension! They called it indicative of a team out of control! It was the worst thing since…Randy Moss fake mooned the cheeseheads! Western civilization was crumbling! Then they went to one of their own, Chris Mortensen, who just shrugged and said it might be worthy of a fine, but likely not a suspension. Clearly, Mortensen forgot to drink his Kool Aid. I’m not saying it was okay for Brayton to jam his knee into Stevens’ groin (I would have preferred a fist to Stevens’ melon), but it hardly merited the Chicken Little outcry.
5. So, where do we go from here? You tell me. I'm out of answers. There's no point in discussing our defense. Our defense is ready, willing and capable. It's all about the offense at this point.
posted by Raider Take at 10:20 PM
75 Comments:
Yeah, it was ugly, RT.
The one major contrast I can see between the offense and defense is that Raider defenders seem so much more confident, even when lining up, than the offensive players do. Raider defenders know where they're supposed to be, where they're going, and are confident that if they execute properly, something good will happen. The offensive players just seem to be trying to avoid disaster on every play. I don't think they believe in what they're doing. I don't think they're convinced that good execution of the system will lead to good things. Their body language says everything. They're beaten before they take the first snap.
Tom Walsh clearly hasn't sold the offense on the merits of his approach (whatever they might be). He'll have to go, probably fairly soon. An interim OC will have to take over playcalling for the rest of the season, and then the Raiders will have to seek out someone new from among the many position coaches around the league.
like i said - FIRE WALSH AL! WHAT THE F- WERE YOU THINKING WHEN YOU TOOK THIS GUY BACK?
this coming off season should be one to get some offensive linemen to protect walter. it's official - gallery is a BUST! what a waste of such a high pick. yet another draft to think of what superstar player we could have had. ie: sean taylor, weinslow jr., fitzgerald, roy n dj williams - freakin phillip rivers for cryin out loud!
i had a bunch more crap to write but why waste time?
this guys adorable.
-Franco, raider fan in ireland
Just Sad, Baby! Haiku
I've said it all year
"Defenses are like chicken"
Where's the recipe?
Art needs to fire Walsh to save himself. If he doesn't get someone new to run the offense, and this continues, I don't think Art should be safe either. The organization, the players, and the fans should not be made to suffer because of blind loyalty.
When will the offense implosion cease? By all real-world measures, Walsh should be fired TODAY. How can Al and Art still "trust" this guy?
Fast fact: Raiders shut-out 167 consecutive minutes on MNF.
Am I the only one that thinks Randy Moss has turned into a below-average receiver? And, why not play Jerry Porter and take some pressure off Moss' coverage? Just when we all thought the Porter stupidity was over, it's still alive and going strong?
Defense!!! Warren Sapp had a monster game! The D spent over 35 minutes on the field and kept it close (despite the shut-out). If this D had an O, we'd have a W, maybe even a bunch of them.
The Brayton incident is a joke. Stevens is the one that should be fined for head-butting Swaggert earlier in the game.
Walsh This is Football 101
Your poker lesson
Opponent should go "All In"
From established bluff.
Same with the game plan
Make them think you've got nothing
Then throw Royal Flush
Sometimes the best solution is the easiest one - can Walsh, and do it now. To those who think it won't help short-term I think it will. It's obvious that this offense has no clue what it's doing, and no confidence. By firing Walsh (and Art has to do it, not Al), he will show that he puts his loyalty to his own damn team over his loyalty to one guy.
With a full offseason (and more) to find a replacement, I have to believe they will do a better job of it.
Note: the above comment by Franco refers to a comment that has been deleted. The deleted comment was rendered by a non-entity who has been banned from Raider Take for crimes against brain cells. See my 10/23 take for more information.
JS, great to hear from you! Nice take.
NY Raider, I agree with you on the receivers. If you're going to ignore the run, then at least get your best receivers involved in the game.
Keep bringing it, Scorpio! Mad Stork, I'm afraid you may have a point. Raider Nate, thanks for the comic haiku relief.
The thing that hacks me off the most about all of this, is Shell hired this clown from the beginning shunning John Shoop (who was QB Coach, and is now the TE Coach). The offensive unit wanted John Shoop as OC, he's a brilliant guy who knows the basics of football, unlike the current jackass who learned football from playing Super Tecmo Bowl with his son on Sega Genesis.
13 CARRIES, 64 YARDS in the Running Game. Jordan averaged 7 per carry alone, and JACKASS calls for passing, to net a total of 9 sacks to the f#^$%@#) Seahawks! I'M F#$*@%G BENT THIS MORNING! THE FIRST NEWS REPORT THAT WE SHOULD HEAR TODAY IS THAT WALSH'S SORRY ASS HAS BEEN CANNED! I WANT TO SEE HIS BLOOD!
What's Jim Haslet doing? Plenty of experience, Raider pedegre.
The sad thing is that I like this basic offense. But, when you have this offense and they've shown over and over that their strength is running the ball, you HAVE to commit to the running game. No excuses for coming in and throwing the ball like they did last night...
--Alan
A lot of you guys actually sound suprised. I know everyone was on a high about the last two games. But look at who we beat... The 1-7 cardinals and the 2-6 steelers. Who cares what they won last year. Do you people want to know why the media is so down on our team. Its because we hired a f**king mayor to run a profesional football teams offense. These other teams at least their offense can get a first down and convert 3rd downs. The funny thing (actually very sad) is that they didnt do anything different from the last two games that they have played. The offense has not gotten any better. They are averaging 6 sacks a game. The offense is not getting any better... and it wont. That is not until some serious changes are made. and we all know what those need to be.
Dan, I disagree with what you said, when you said, "Supposedly, we don't have anyone else who has ever called plays."
JOHN SHOOP! He's been with the Raiders since Gruden, and understands the West Coast, and the Gilman. He should've been the choice as offensive coordinator at the beginning of the year.
Now Davis needs to do what he did to Shell, fire Walsh, apologize to Shoop, and give him the reigns.
I'm with everyone in this--make Walsh walk the plank now [Sorry, Art, you gotta do to Walsh what Al did to you last time 'round], put Shoop in charge of the O and let him start building toward next year over the last eight games...and please put in some decent short yardage plays
It's as obvious as the hair on Rob Ryan's Head. MAKE ROB THE HEAD COACH!!! ......... Now after you are all done laughing and making your silly and outrageous/ colorful remarks think about this..... (1)What was John Madden Before he was Head Coach? And(2) Why would Al Davis Demand that Rob Be kept on as DC when Rob isn't even one of the Raiders longtime family members. Just maybe, AL sees something in Rob he once saw before...roughly thirty years ago? Not saying that it's the only answer but Rob DOES know how to motivate, teach and if you will get guys to "buy" into his system ... in other words LEAD.
And what this offense needs right now is a leader. Whether it's a coach or at least an offensive player. Nothing like watching your offensive players sit and sulk(MOSS)or pace the sideline(JORDAN) but no one is seen trying to motivate each other. Then of course there's Art who just stands and stares like a Deer in the Headlights and making checkmarks on his clipboard. At least Rob tried to stand up to Refs and get a play reviewed, he ended up with a flag thrown but he was sticking up for his guys. Not just shrugging his shoulders and walking away to mark his clipboard, you know the one Tui Supposed to be carrying so the Headcoach can monitor the play calling by the Bed and Breakfast Mayor..... Sorry but I digress.
In other words a definite coaching change is needed!
Ok, Walsh has done a terrible job as OC, but I just don't see booting him as the cure all.
Art Shell himself said after the game that the poor blocking was the reason the offense struggled.
Does that mean Jackie Slater/Eatman, should be fired too ?
And what about the head guy, Shell. Isn't he the one insisting on starting Whitted, & C. Anderson Dudley every game, even though it is painfully obvious to all watching that they can't play a lick ?
I am renewing my call for Steve Mariuchi to be brought in as OC, and possible even HC if Shell doesn't show some type of a spark of an idea of what he's doing.
Don, Stuck in NY.
Madden knew Al Davis prior to the Raiders when they both coached in San Diego State (I believe). Madden was the Linebackers Coach in SDSU. Then when Al came to the Raiders, shortly afterwards, he hired Madden as the Linebackers Coach, then Defensive Coord, then Head Coach.
I think the reason why Al Davis is committed to Rob, is because Rob is committed to the Raiders. I agree, if he continues to show quality leadership like this, then when Art Shell becomes owner of the Raiders (soon, and see BlandaRocked's take on this in his blog spot), then Rob will be Head Coach.
I agree with you guys about Ryan. I would love for him to be the next HC of the Raiders, as long as he can choose his own guy to run the offense.
As for when that happens, I was hoping maybe the '08 season. But as I said before, if Art insists on insulting everyone who loves the Raiders by sticking with Walsh, then I will lose my sympathy for him. The team comes first. Here's the "money quote" from the Chronicle's article on Walsh a couple of days ago:
"Lay aside the dumbfounded employees within the hierarchy, one of whom described the Raiders' offense as "an absolute embarrassment" under Walsh."
We're saying it, the media is saying it, people IN the organization are saying it, and I'd bet my house that the players are saying it in private too. 50,000,000 Elvis fans can't be wrong. Wake up, Art.
This does start at the executive level. Al has chased and fired away several coaches from the Raiders that have in turn taken the “Raider Way” to their new teams and shown the recipe with Superbowl success. The Broncos look more like the Raiders than the Raiders do. I don’t know how it could get much better. How many Raideresque type coaches declined the interview this year, not wanting to be part of Al’s drama?
Unless Al dictated the Brooks acquisition and putting the franchise of the future tag on Walter’s shoulders, Art has to take the blame too. Art is a good coach and doesn’t just use the Raider’s catch phrases, but lives them. But come on Art…, show some emotion. Get mad about losing, at least Brayton and Sapp show they care. Don’t just stand there writing on your clipboard. In Art’s day as a player, there was plenty of attitude so Art if you are bringing back the “Raider Way” let Jerry Porter play and prove himself on the field.
The offense is not just flat, it is pathetic. Walter is not showing any leadership. Running off the field and throwing the ball isn’t what a leader does. As much as I like Randy, he has been dropping a bunch of passes. Why the Raiders are throwing like that in a driving rain storm when the running game has been the best part of the offense, I don’t know.
Could it be an Offensive Coordinator? How many positions will the offensive linemen be rotated through? How will they ever learn the positions? Maybe working in a B&B is where Walsh needs to be. The NFL has dramatically changed in the last 10 years, what worked in the mid-nineties won’t necessarily translate to today.
Al needs to let off the reigns a bit, empower a coach that is a leader, and let the players play with emotion. And get a QB with some heart since Brooks, Walter, and Tui barely have one together.
Is Walsh fired yet?
It wouldn't matter who was calling the plays for the Raiders right now and if the play were straight out of The Art of War, the players wouldn't execute the strategy and tactics properly. Walsh is just the most obvious scapegoat at hand.
Moss and Anderson shouldn't drop passes, the O-linemen shouldn't perform like five disembodied fingers who instead should be part of the same hand, Walter shouldn't stand there and take the next sack when he could throw the ball away instead once in a while... and on and on it goes.
Which brings us to another haiku moment:
Sign says "Help Wanted:
Players who can execute.
Sun Tzu will coach you."
We managed to squeak by Pittsburg with almost no passing attempts and an overload on the running game. The result was a win without any offensive production. So the nation was appalled and wanted more passing from Walter in the next game. The good news is Shell and co headed the request. Unfortunately, intelligence and maturity will tell you the best chance for success comes through moderate action vs. extreme behavior. The smart thing to do would have been to call a healthy dosage of Lamont Jordan followed up with passing attempts. Somehow we have become rooted within the throngs of predictability which is what happened last night.
To add to the seemingly unintelligent strategy which has been so easily dissected by any opposing defensive coordinator is the poor leadership qualities of Shell. Great leaders are commanding and in charge, however, they also have the ability to empathize with their workers. They are compassionate and understanding when they need to be. They have the ability to make positive examples out of themselves through action alone. They don't need to make examples out of players by treating them as outcasts. Porter being right or wrong is not the issue anymore, its the method that Shell has employed which is wrong.
In summary, a less then adequate group of players, offensive line, a poor game plan and dogmatic leadership is keeping us from our commitment to excellence. We can change players fairly easily, however, can we improve our level of football IQ as well as make Mr.Shell a more tolerant and successful leader?
Love your takes! It is nice to read the perpective of someone actually paying attention to the game, rather than listening to Theismann gush over getting Christian Slater in the booth.
Here are 5 additional thoughts:
1) Shell's comments after the game such as "we need to block & execute better" are offensive!! 2 offensive coordinators who ran systems far superior to ours have been fired this season
2) When Shell played, an O-lineman could hold their block for 4-5 seconds, one-on-one. In today's NFL, the best O-lineman in the game have trouble containing someone like D. Burgess for much longer than 3 seconds.
3) So what do we do? We bring in more people to block...as many as 8 in some situations. Which leaves 2 receivers running long, slow routes. Hell, the "D" can bring 7 and still have double coverage. If we let the TE run a route and they single cover him, the "D" can still rush 6.
4) Why not send 5 receivers on routes? Make 2 of them "hot" routes and get rid of the damn ball! That will make the "D" reconsider bringing an all-out pass ruch every play. As well as mixing in a few screens, bootlegs, play action and everything else announcers, former players, armchair QB's and the Nation have been calling for all season.
5) Our inability to make half-time adjustments is unparalleled. We are exactly the same team in the second half as we are in the first half. un-f$%&ing-believable.
When employees are half assing it or failing to perform their basic job descriptions, regardless of whether it's lack of motivation or lack of talent, and when the department in question is running the entire company into the ground, you have to ask: Who's running this department? Who is in charge of this group?
It is the responsibility of the department head, or heads, to establish the plan AND the personnel necessary to succeed. Anything less is a failure of this responsibility. Identifying failure is not scapegoating.
Remember, we're not talking about mere mediocrity here. We're talking about an offense that is displaying impotence of epic proportions.
It may be true that certain players are totally incapable of performing their basic job functions; in which case, it's the coaching staff's responsibility to reshuffle the depth chart. And if you say, well, the next guy on the depth chart is worse than a guy who can't perform his basic job functions, then you have a major personnel failure, for which there needs to be accountability at the coaching level.
It's too simplistic to say it's just the players. If you've got an auto repair shop staffed by mechanics who can't even rotate tires or change oil, the problem doesn't start with the mechanics.
Last year we had almost 3600 passing yards, gave up 36 sacks and had nother 1300 rushing yards. Norv had good plays but didn't know when to use them, when to go for it, etc. He was a poor game manager and leader as was KFC. So we go and get a "leader" in Art and unkowingly scrap a good playbook for a bad one. With largely the same personnel as last year, we are completely uncompetitive on offense....and we are still making Norv-like decisions during games, for example, we still punt in fourth and short in enemy territory when behind. Bill Belichick never punts in this situation and [surprise] they win. My point is, I'm not seeing the leadership change we thought would come with Art in charge, we still don't call plays to win and we're doing worse with the same personnel. At a minimum, Walsh has to go and Art should put Shoop in there or dust off Norv's playbook [which should still be in the team's near term memory] and give AW a shot with that. And to the poster who asked about Slater and Eatman, they need to go, too [this same line gave up 36 sacks--just over 2 per game--last year]. Art's gotta get control of this situation now or he's going to be one and done also
Well said, LK. I wish it weren't true.
For a while, I could understand folks who said "it's not Walsh's play calling, it's the execution that's the problem, but at this point Walsh has to GO. You're playing in a monsoon--so you go pass happy??? Whether or not the line was capable of protecting through those interminable 7-step drops (they aren't), the ball is wet, for crissakes and slippery and hard to catch. What are we paying Jordan for?? And where are the outlet plays for a young QB in a noisy hostile (and wet--did I mention wet??) environment? Where are the halftime adjustments? How about coming up with schemes that don't focus around team weaknesses? Look at it this way, if Walsh stays, it's going to be more of the same. If he goes, there's a 50% chance the situation will improve (I'm assuming at this point that things on the offense can't get any worse). I'm sorry, I'm a 45 year old woman who has never actually played a down of football and I could have come up with a better game plan than the one Walsh "thunk up". What a way to ruin the confidence of a young QB--we may never know if Walter had potential, because he's going to be too shell-shocked (or would that be walsh-shocked??) to function. Where's Jim Fassel--did someone hire him? Even Shoop would be better than Walsh. Please, someone make Walsh check out of the Raider facility and leave his room key on the front desk on the way out.
On a slightly better note, the defense is the feistiest, scrappiest, stubbornest we've had in a while and I was proud of how hard they fought. BTW-Stevens kneed Brayton first, but didn't get caught. They BOTH should have been ejected.
I'm the same anon who asked is Walsh was fired, but to elaborate, there's plenty of talent on that side of the ball. Jordan had plenty of room to run off the right side behind Walker and Boothe, yet the OC quit calling those plays. The fact is, there's no identity, attitude or determination on that side of the ball and this is 100% on the OC. And Raider Take, to your point about middle management or top executives; you're right, they hit the top execs but that is not the HC, that's Al himself. This is his team, that's his HC and at the same time that's his DC, who I agree would make a good head coach.
Which brings me to my next point/question, this is my own weird theory but when Gruden split I wondered if maybe Al let him go with the agreement that he'd rebuild an aging defense with draft picks, more money and a potentially new DC and Gru would come back. I know plenty of fans hate Gruden but the fact is since Shell in LA and Flores before him, that's the best this club's been in decades.
Now I'm a Gru fan and would love to see him back, especially working with the youth we now have and Walter who despite some poor decisions could benefit from a more diverse offense but also the D that Ryan's built to back him up.
If my wish/theory is just that, then perhaps the better option is Shell to run Walsh out on a rail now, promote Shoop and then in the off-season mine the college ranks if not the NFL for the kind of stud OC this club and more importantly defense deserves.
Art Shell is a great Raider and an honorable man. Ultimately the offensive unit's failures rest on Art's shoulders ... not the players and not OC Walsh.
Art, being a loyal, trusted friend to Walsh, wants to give his buddy as much latitude as possible to turn the offensive unit around.
I sincerely respect that notion in most circumstances. However, in this particular cases, under these distinct circumstances, Shell needs to do the truly honorable thing and let Walsh go. It would be one thing if the offense was making some progress or at least somewhat competent.
8 games into the season and the offense is averaging 8.6 points per game (2.4 points per 2nd half) has given up 44 sacks, and is ranked dead last in offense. These performance indicators and under the current circumstances requires that a change be made.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm checking the wire reports at least three times a day this week, in the hopes that I see "Raiders Fire Offensive Coordinator" in the sports headlines.
Probably in vain.
It's got to be killing Al Davis to see this organization ridiculed and mocked on national TV...sadly deserved too, going by their three "performances". The mystique is practically gone.
Changing OCs will at least give the nation some hope.
PR wrote:
You can add to your list.."Why didn't CoachShell through the red flag to challenge the spot of the ball on Seattles very first drive?"
Yes, I noticed that too. I think it was Seattle's first first down. It happened on a third down and long conversion. I thought the runner went out about a half yard short of the marker and got a very generous spot. No red flag and nary a mention from the ESPN crew. I know it was early, but it did lead to Seattle's one and only TD of the game.
RT-
Thanks--I wish it weren't true also. Nobody wants to see Big Art succeed more than Raider Nation...I hope he makes a statement move
I've been a Raider fan since I knew what football was. I was born in Oakland in '74, and was raised watching the Raiders with my dad. We lived in LA the majority of my childhood, and I was 9 years old when I went to my first NFL Game. THE '83-'84 AFC Championship Game against the Seahags!
A team that punched you in the mouth on both sides of the ball, under Tom Flores, which is why he won 2 Super Bowls.
I have never seen the Raiders play this bad EVER! And that is even counting when Rusty Hilger and Todd Marijuanavich were at the helm.
I said it earlier, it is Football 101, when you offensive line is having trouble with pass protection, you call running plays. Why? Running plays help develope a blockers footing, speed off the ball, physical hitting, use of hands, etc. That is why, even in the West Coast Offense, nobody has abandoned the run. Even the Colts run the ball, and they do it to throw off the blitz!
Someone mentioned that we complained about 95 total yards from hard running. No I was complaining about a lack of balance! Go back to the Gruden years. If you look at the stats of all of his games, there were similar numbers of running and passing plays. There was a balance that always kept the defense guessing. That balance helped set up the next play. A play was ran with purpose. There was a reason we ran or pass the ball; it set up what we were going to do next. The players found leadership in the play-calling.
This is what Walsh lacks. There is no rhyme or reason to his play calling. There is no balance to his plan of attack. There is no leadership in it. It's like he's calling plays, just to call plays.
I have consistently complained about this guy. The only time I did not, was against Arizona because it truly looked like we were getting our act together. And them BAM! Back to the chalkboard.
I don't think "Offense Football Schemes for Dummies" would help Walsh because he just doesn't understand the game, and it shows.
ESPN TV media (Shaun Salsberry) acknowledged the "Raiders' defense is playoff caliber." Unfortunately, nobody can explain the offense (the laughing stock of professional sports).
Raiders have not scored an offensive TD in five of eight games played this year. This is not a little problem.
We've all tried to rationalize what's happening right now, and it appears we're all pretty much in agreement... something must be done on a coaching level. Don't be fooled, we have the player personnel on offense to succeed. We just can't implement a game plan to even resemble their talents.
This is getting really tiring. Many of you have said this before my post, but why can't Art (and Al) do the honorable thing and pull the trigger on Tom Walsh...if only to be a scapegoat, then a scapegoat is what is needed... for the players and for the fans.
Besides being incredibly obvious, it would seem to make good business sense. How many more sell-outs can the Raiders expect if the Raider Nation gives up on their team's current direction?
Hello! Is there anybody in the proverbial Ivry Tower? I live way out in NY... can anyone tell me if the lights are on in Raiderland? Is there anybody home?
I'm going to recommend the state of CA take ownership of the team through eminent domain and implement an "average" offensive system. That would be a huge step up.
I do want to say, I still believe Walter can get it done. He just needs better coaching (all the way around).
FIRE SHELL AND WALSH!
I am tired of seeing our team going into ruins because of the lack of depth in taking risks. Football is mental as well as physical. We are neither, except our defense is rocking hard. They fight every game. Offensively we just let other teams do what they want. I am sick to my stomach as well as the rest of the Nation.
Al, let the past go, give Jimmy Johnson a call. You guys talk throughout the season. And Jimmy has said on national T.V. that he would love to coach the Raiders if given the chance to and call the shots. Jimmy can motivate like no other.
RT: I respectfully disagree. The corporate analogy with executives and such just does not work for football. A football team is not a corporation.
If it were, then Art Shell would be more eminently qualified than any other HC in the game today, seeing has how he was Senior Executive VP of the NFL just last year...
The truth is Shell's executive abilities may or may not contribute to how well he runs the team, but you'd find a hard time finding anyone who thinks he is the best HC in the game right now.
As Coach Madden once pointed out, running a football team is as close to being a child psychologist as any other profession. It certainly doesn't resemble a Fortune 500 company with suits and ties and boardrooms.
Anyway, you can fire your salesman if he isn't meeting some quota and hire a new one pretty quickly. Problem is you can't just go around firing your HC or OC or players every time sales are down.
For example, Andrew Walter absolutely has the worst numbers of any QB in football. They are here for our embarrassment. So what are you going to do? Fire 'em?
Great idea. Now who starts? The practice squad QB? Tui? Jeff George? You can't trade for a QB this late. YIKES!
The truth is there is too much money, draft picks, and time invested in these players to just off 'em midseason. The players are almost untouchable right now, no matter how badly they perform.
Porter would have been gone this season if not for the $. Gibson would have been given up on long ago if not for the #1 draft pick, and so on...
If players do not perform, it is not at all clear you can hold them accountable by firing them midseason or just replacing them with a scrub. You are stuck with lousy performance at this point.
Moreover, I highly doubt that even as incompetent as Tom Walsh is, he instructs Andrew Walter to leave the Center exchange at the snap early. Yet we have seen Walter do this at least a half dozen times this season leading to fumbles.
I highly doubt Walsh has instructed Walter to force the ball in places it shouldn't be thrown. Walter's doing so is why Art Shell benched him during a game. Settle 'em down. Don't let 'em try to do to much and blow what little chances we have to win. Yet here is Walter with a 3/9 : TD/INT ratio. Is this really Shell or Walsh's fault?
Walsh is up in the booth calling plays or working crossword puzzles or whatever he is doing. He certainly isn't on the field or on the sidelines supervising Walter's throwing decisions and snap exchanges.
My point is that Walsh is the most convenient scapegoat in this thing, but he certainly is not the only problem. Now I don't like the guy myself and question his ability.
For example, in a soggy, windy, rain-soaked environment like Seattle, common sense tells you it is time to run the ball. What did Walsh do? He passed 46 times and ran 11. Stoopid is as stoopid does.
But it is a bit much to think Walsh is solely responsible for the feces the players leave on the field every week. Yes, the play calling does suck. But the execution of the plays called swallows.
It is the players' responsibility to play the game, not the coaches'.
Otherwise I'd believe we'd see Art Shell put on a helmet and line up himself out of sheer disgust at this O-line and Freddie B. slap on some stickum and show Moss how to make a catch on Monday Night.
I concur, Walsh must go, but let's look at his hiring in addition to his non-performance. It was a major screw up to hire Art as late as we did. If we had taken an offensive guru-type, we would have had the OC part down, and considering that Ryan was already on the payroll, we'd have been in great shape. Waiting so long put us behind the 8 ball in terms of getting a staff, especially since Art wasn't active, didn't have any assistants to bring over, etc. Walsh, Slater, and the rest of the offensive staff have not proven to be the answer, but what legitimate alternatives did Art have? There were likely not many proven options, and the ones still out there at that time would likely have passed based on what our recent history has been. So, while I don't want to completely absolve Art for his selections, I can give him a partial pass on this one. Why not go back to your old guy, if you're not impressed with the alternatives?
I think more coaches than Walsh need to go. Slater & Eatman may not have the best talent to work with, but improvement should be visible by now. I don't know that Freddie has been a great coach - with the drops all the way around, problems with Porter, etc, should he stay? Has McElwain helped out Walter at all? I was hopeful that Walter would show improvement, but he hasn't progressed as quickly as he should have. Jordan admited to not knowing the blocking schemes last year, and puts less effort into pass blocking than some kids on my son's Pop Warner team. Gotta hold Peete accountable for that. My point is, regardless if we can Walsh, load up Shoop, we probably need to clean house on that side of the ball.
The great thing is, there will be no surprises - expect it all to happen as soon as the season is over. We should be able to devote the entire offseason to the offense. We finished the major rebuilding effort on the defensive side, our kicking game is proficient, and if Art can steer the team to the end of the season without mutiny (moving Walsh out should be enough to accomplish that goal), we will have enough pieces in place to entice a good OC. The talent is better than the performance, and it's obvious Art won't interfere with the playcalling, so we should have a better shot at an OC than we did in enticing someone to take over as head coach. I think Art is a solid buffer to Al, so a coordinator should be able to come in and do his job, just as Ryan has done. Talent evaluation has improved, as our drafts have been excellent the last couple of years. I just hope it doesn't take 3 years to turn the offense around.
Hey, I compared the Raiders to an auto repair shop, not IBM!
Whether it's a corporation or an auto shop or a football team, it comes down to being an organization with a hierarchy. And within that hierarchy are related levels of responsibility for the organization's performance. This is why coaches of really bad football teams often lose their jobs.
Are you telling me that we don't have a crisis at the offensive coaching level after we go pass happy in rainy Seattle with a jumpy QB and a broken o-line? After we remove Justin Fargas and the running game from the game plan? After we fail again to make any significant adjustments? After we continue to drop back five and seven steps while our QB is getting sacked at a record rate?
Say it ain't so, Stick'Em!
The players don't decide who plays, nor do they call the plays, the coaches do!
RT: LOL ~
Nope. I continue to maintain the point of view that the play calling sucks. If you have a plan to get Walsh drunk, dress 'em in high heels, then take photos of him having sex with a donkey, I'm with you.
But I also maintain the point of view players don't execute the plays that are called. That is the players' responsibility. If it isn't, then exactly what are they responsible for?
Ok, to the auto shop analogy. Say me and you and panty tried to pass ourselves off as auto workers...
Then come to find out that between the three of us we couldn't change a tire...
I would call it like it is: we're incompetent grease monkeys no matter who the boss is!
What I'm getting at is we ran the last scapegoats out of town already. KFC and Norv are gone. At some point the Raiders have to say enough turnover and just let the players and coaches do their thing for a while before making anymore wholesale changes. At least until the end of the season...
The sad truth is the Raiders are in a rebuilding stage and are not so good. There will be no playoffs this year. Time to let the young kids play and figure out who is dead wood and who plays hard enough to be here next year...
Stick'em,
You say the raiders are in a rebuilding stage, but I can only half agree with this.
The Raiders have been bad, really bad, since 2003. Three head coaches later, we are now almost in 2007, and the Raiders, at least on offense, are still very bad.
The problem up til now has been the Raiders have been stuck somewhere in between rebuilding, and reloading, never really totally commiting to one or the other.
But as I've said before, I don't see the firing of Walsh as the cure all.
Walsh is OC, because Shell wanted to run this offense.
Shell is HC, because Davis wanted to run this offense.
So, it seems to me, that all three men, Davis, Shell, and Walsh, are equally responsible for the offensive horror we watch each week.
No TD's by the offense for 10 straight quarters, and counting....
I have to disagree with my good pal Stick'em on his statement,
"It wouldn't matter who was calling the plays for the Raiders right now and if the play were straight out of The Art of War, the players wouldn't execute the strategy and tactics properly. Walsh is just the most obvious scapegoat at hand.
The playcalling is your basic roadmap or platform or instructions or blueprint (and I could go on and on) for what your offense is attempting to execute and accomplish.
I will give you one good example of playcalling during a Raider game this year and 1 bad example to illustrate my point:
Good: Against the Cards, the playcalling was a nice mix of run and pass. Walsh had Walter throw quite a few short pass plays on 1st down and stayed with the run game throughout. The results (or execution) were mixed: 4 scoring drives (2 TDs + 2 FGs) but 5 turnovers.
Bad: Against the Seahawks, the playcalling was a bad, unbalanced mix (46 pass to 11 run). Why abandon the run if you are down by only 2 scores (10 points) with more than 30:00 minutes on the clock? Why abandon the run if it is showing success? Why abandon the run when it is the one thing the O-line is doing adequately? This lack of basic common sense is unacceptable. In essence, Walsh was setting up the O-unit to fail.
Yes, I realize that with someone else calling the plays that the players on the offensive side of the ball will probably continue to perform inconsistently. However making an immediate change in just the OC slot makes a ton of sense.
What possible downside would there be to slapping the interim OC tag on Shoop? or put another way... what is the upside of allowing Walsh to remain through the season?The remaining 8 games should not be wasted. There needs to be a sense of urgency to getting the offensive unit playing respectable, competent football and certainly the playcalling has a direct impact on the bottom line. The bottom line: The Raiders have had 94 offensive possesions in 8 games. These numbers paint a picture that is beyond crisis mode:
8 games
5 of 8 games = 0 TDs
94 total possessions breakdown:
44 punts
12 interceptions
9 fumbles
9 field goals
8 loss of downs
6 TDs
4 end of half/game possessions
1 safety
1 missed FG
69 points in 94 possessions; 8.6 points per game.
I love my Raiders, but I find it hard to watch that offense. Monday night, I kinda wish I had a little sensor on my TV to let me know when the D takes the field... you know what I mean? I just turned the channel after Seattle punted it. We would have won most, it not all of our games if our damn O- line would give the freakin' qb some time and if Moss would freakin CATCH!! I didn't want to invite anyone over like I usually do. I just watch our games alone now. I don't know if it's Walsh, the line, but I feel it's BOTH! I'm an optomist and I know that we will rise again!!
Anon 6:58 said, "Al, let the past go, give Jimmy Johnson a call. You guys talk throughout the season. And Jimmy has said on national T.V. that he would love to coach the Raiders if given the chance to and call the shots. Jimmy can motivate like no other."
I disagree with this statement. Al does and has talked with JJ, and JJ said on National TV that he does not want to coach again. Al has given JJ the opportunity to be our coach since Gruden left, that is how Norv was brought in as coach, at the suggestion of JJ. Al has even asked Howie Long, and both have turned down coaching opportunities. Why? They are making more as media heads. JJ wouldn't have control of GM. JJ wouldn't get to choose his staff. Neither would Howie.
JJ had his turn with how things are run in Oakland when he went to Miami (which is funny that nobody is talking about how Shula is ruining the Dolphins). JJ has had multiple opportunities to come coach for the Raiders, and hasn't taken them, doesn't want to either.
He's friends with Al, and Howie, and he feels it would damage his friendship and respect.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I absolutely agree with RT. Whether it's a corporation, auto shop or football team, ultimate responsibility always rests at the top. At the end of the day, this is a business, not a game. A lot of money is at stake for Raiders' ownership, the Oakland and bay-area business community and other team owners in the NFL who expect the Raiders to be a successful and marketable entity.
On a small scale, there's an immediate concern that the players will lose any confidence they have left that their leaders will implement a game plan they can believe in and succeed with.
This particularly scares me on the defensive side of the ball, where we have complete respectability right now. Defensive players have admittedly ignored the offense woes and continue to play "their game" as if that's all that matters.
But to players (and fans) winning matters most. And eventually, even the D is going to get sick of playing 35 to 40 minutes a game because the offense can't make adjustments.
I agree with those who believe Shoop should be promoted to OC. This guy was not only passed over at the start of the season, he was by some measures demoted from QB coach to TE coach. WHY?
He has OC experience, and a greater knowledge of the dynamics of current NFL thinking.
If nothing else, a scapegoat is made of OC Tom Walsh, and Shoop provides some spark to a team that is losing its self-confidence.
The immediate concern is that something is done before Art loses control of the team. Right now the defense is playing at a very high level, and the offensive players appear to be trying their best to implement a game plan that many of them probably don't believe in.
Panty Raider:
I'm beginning to seriously wonder if 2 plays truly are called in the huddle. Is this really done each play? I have heard from Walter himself that even 1 play is a mouthful to spit out in the huddle (20 words long) let alone 2.
Is it possible that there are only select times that he is given 2 plays but normally it is just 1? With the crowd noise, the Raiders having difficulties getting in and out of the huddle, getting a play off before 0:00, I find it hard to believe that Walter was given 2 plays each snap to choose from.
As far as sticking Shoop in the booth with Walsh, I'm not worried about what the mediots think or "saving face". All I care about are results. 6 TDs in 94 possessions/8 games has put us past the point of "saving face". If the Raiders want to keep Walsh as a "paid consultant" on staff for the remainder of the season, fine.
A couple follow up points to Stick'em:
I hate to have the auto shop analogy beat to death but...
There was a very important point that you left out of your auto shop / football analogy ... training (or in football terms, coaching). If you couldn't change a tire, who is responsible for showing you how? Who is the person responsible for giving you the necessary tools?
Also, I totally agree with your point about an NFL team's hands being tied in terms of making in season changes which is another reason that it makes sense to make the 1 change that would have the greatest short term and long term impact...replace OC Walsh. We know HC Shell isn't going anywhere. We know that the 53 man roster is set. Slapping the interim tag on Shoop is the most practical solution.
More dropped balls than puberty. O-Line is consistantly horrible. Unbelievably bad play-calling. Man, this sucks. My biggest fear is that Shell's stubborn loyalty may get him fired again and we start over. Shell is in danger of losing the players already. Shell has a very important lesson to learn in sepperating personal life from business. Billick fired a good friend, so can he. Hey maybe we can swap and let McNair get sacked 9 times a game?!? Son of a...
Psycho
CJ: You guys seem to be missing my point, so I guess I haven't been clear enough. My bad.
I am not a Tom Walsh apologist. He does not impress me and I'm not interested in making excuses for his problems.
However, all these players have been here now for at least a season. Who is the new face on offense? Boothe?
My point is, I'm tired of hearing about how Callahan was too hard. I'm tired of hearing about how Turner was too soft. This isn't f'ing Goldilocks and the Three Bears where the players get to wait until every thing is just right.
When are we going to hold the players accountable for not playing? Are you telling me that Randy Moss needs someone to teach 'em how to catch after nine seasons in the NFL?
Are you telling me Andrew Walter hasn't been taking snaps from Center during his lifetime of playing football and needs someone to teach 'em how to do this?
If these players don't have basic fundamentals of the game down yet, when do you start blaming them for not getting it?
I don't know whether this offense will ever work with Walsh... wait and see... Remember, we all blasted Ryan his first year for running a 3-4 with Sapp at End and Brayton at LB. We stuck with 'em and things turned around. Will Walsh turn out like Ryan? Dunno...
I do know that if the Raiders keep changing Coaches every year or two this team absolutely will not be good. The players will never get it and coaches won't want to come here because there is no stability.
Fire all the offensive coaches now and this team will still suck, and probably suck longer than if we held steady and had patience. This offense is rebuilding like the defense already has.
Stick'Em:
I am crystal clear on your point. Just like you are not an apologist for OC Walsh, I'm not an apologist for the players piss poor performance. I'm not blaming Walsh for the poor fundamentals displayed by Moss, Walter, the O-line etc. What I am blaming him for are the following;
(a) poorly designed schemes & playcalling (ie. 7 step drops when you QB is getting destroyed; designing plays that actually work against the 3-4 D, etc.)
(b) lack of common sense (abandoning the run vs. Sea)
(c) convoluted play call terminology (20 words for 1 play)
(d) inability to make in game adjustments (2.7 pts. per 2nd half)
(e) not understanding the strengths and weaknesses of his personnel and calling plays that takes this into account.
(f) poor, improper useage of personnel (ex. taking Moss, Porter, and Curry off the field for 2 and goal vs. Pitt)
There are HUGE differences when comparing Ryan and Walsh. The biggest differences are obvious;
(1) the players believe in Ryan and that he will do everything in his power to put them in a position to succeed.
(2) Ryan was willing and able to adapt and change his scheme and design to fit the players on board
(3) Ryan has strong personal relationships with the players who will walk through fire for him.
Finally, I don't think anyone has suggested a wholesale change of the entire offensive coaching staff. Replacing just Walsh is hardly going to cause instability within the organization.
It's really mind boggling. Stick'em and CJ both make good points. There is no question the players need to execute better, however, I have to agree with CJ and many others that the onus lies more on the coaching staff at this point (i.e., after an extensive off-season program, five-week preseason schedule and eight weeks into the regular season).
What's worse, aren't we experiencing some of the same problems as during Walsh's first stint with the Raiders? Like, De Ja Vu! Seems like all he's doing at this point is proving the original nay-sayers were right.
For the sake of argument, let's assume the offensive problems are a combination of player and coaching mistakes.
Stick'em made the point that the "players are untouchable." I agree with that, particularly in short-term...too much is invested.
Therefore, the simplest solution which should immediately impact the team, perhaps infuse confidence into the system and players, is to replace the OC.
Okay, maybe that's just a bandaide on a broken leg, but something needs to be done and that's the most obvious choice.
Stick'Em, I totally agree that it's "time to let the young kids play and figure out who is dead wood and who plays hard enough to be here next year."
This is, in fact, a factor in my determination that we are experiencing an offensive coaching crisis.
Why aren't they reshuffling the o-line dept chart (really, could the o-line play get any worse)? Where's John Madsen at tight end? Why hand the ball to Justin Fargas just once (he's averaging 4.6 yard per carry)? Johnnie Morant?
I agree that many of our current starters, for whatever reason, can't play well, and that they belong to our recent dismal past, not our future. So why are they playing?
ok, so i (the customer) roll into this shop that hired you, stick'em and panty, i tell your boss (the guy that hired you) i need my tire fixed. he in turn tells his team of stooges to attack the problem, to which you guys proceed to screw up in "epic" proportions. wasting my time and money as a customer. when i complain to your boss, and he see's the inept work the stooges have done to my ride. i, the customer am desevering of watching him FIRE all three of the incompetents. but the responsibility should fall to him for hiring you to begin with. if he rehiressomeone of the same ilk as the previous dudes, he will be fired too.
this said, i feel a move at OC couldn't really be a bad thing. what,we'll be confused on sunday? seen that. we'll struggle while they get used to the new guy? uh....ditto. what bad things can happen that aren't happening now? but there are several positive things that could happen if we make the move. Shoop ran an offense in Chicago that was similarly poor as ours, not quite this bad but bad, and it's about limiting the turnovers and sustaining a drive for a few minutes so our money players (the D) can catch their breath!!! i think he'd be best suited for a midseason move. so pull the trigger, whats the worst that could happen? you could get RT, stick'em and panty to fix your tire i guess.
PR: Raiders have authentic P Buchanon jerseys online for $89. I'd wait a couple more weeks, they might be willing to send us all new jerseys along with a check for $10.
Keep it positive my man!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
CJ: This is one of those chicken or the egg questions, methinks.
Does Walsh's poor play calling make the players look lost... or does the players' poor execution make Walsh look like he's smoking crack in the booth?
The answer is "Yes".
I agree with all your criticisms of Walsh, mi amigio. If I were OC (and we're all glad I'm not) there would be an offense much more conducive to Andrew Walter's development in place.
Let Walter hand the ball off 50% of the plays. No way you can expect 'em to carry this team with the O-line in shambles.
Give the guy some outlet receivers (RBs, TEs). Put Curry on the field. He's a move-the-chains receiver. Let 'em complete some short passes to get his confidence up instead of trying to sling the low percentage long bombs every series.
Give 'em some shorter drops. Tell 'em that if he can count to three and he still has the ball in his hand, sling it out of bounds near a receiver, every time, so he doesn't get piled on by the pass rush.
Otherwise, the Raider O-line will set some sort of record for sacks allowed and we'll be talking about Walter in the past tense - as in what could have been.
I guess the bottom line is it is easy to point the finger and say "HE is the problem."
I think the problem is much bigger than just Walsh not doing things that seem pretty basic to the rest of us, though him having a clue certainly would help.
It doesn't take a math major to figure out a 4:1::pass:run ratio in Seattle weather is borderline retarded offensive uncoordinating.
But somehow I don't believe pulling a Denny Green and blasting Walsh, cutting him loose mid stream is going to help.
Last I checked the Cards are still... the Cards, even after changing OCs.
My fear is the Raiders are slipping closer and closer to becoming the Cards, where folks expect us to lose week in and week out for the foreseeable future.
IMO, stability is needed right now to keep that from happening.
If you guys are storming Walsh's house with pitchforks and torches, be my guest. But this team will still suck until the players get it.
Time takes time.
RT: To speak to the Three Stooges auto analogy. Walsh and Art didn't hire these stooges on offense. The only ones they are responsible for bringing aboard are McQ and Boothe, and perhaps Brooks.
If you want to blame someone for the personnel it has to be Al Davis, Mike Lombardi, and Sean Jones. They chose these offensive players. These players were here long before Art picked up the phone...
I also would like to see Fargas, Curry, Madsen, and Morant in the mix. Let 'em play. We have already seen what Jordan, Whitted, Anderson, and Moss are doing.
However, reshuffling the O-line again is simply going to make things worse. The musical chairs of the past few years is exactly what got the O-line in the f'ing mess it is in now.
These guys are supposed to be a unit, not just a bunch of easily replaceable, interchangeable parts.
I agree with everyone about playing the younger guys at this point.
Really there is nothing to lose, and everything to gain right now.
As we've seen with Walter, Booth, Mcquistan, and others, young players will make mistakes.
Why not get some of the mistakes out of the way this year, rather then live through them next year.
Makes sense to me.
Sir Stick'Em: (I've knighted you on behalf of the Royal throne)
As I posted on my blog a few weeks ago, I don't think it is necessarily a "chicken or egg" argument. It is more a "chicken and egg" argument meaning that both the players and Walsh are culpable for the shortcomings.
Good playcalling can enhance the execution.
Good execution can make the playcalling look better.
Bad playcalling can make the execution more difficult.
Bad execution makes the playcalling look worse. Got it?
One of the key roles of an OC and a QB is to manage the game. Along those lines, look what Pitt did with Big Ben his 1st year. Now, I'm not suggesting that the Raiders are as talented as Pittsburgh was that year BUT it was a solid game plan to manage the game and minimize Big Ben's mistakes. I think he average just under 20 pass attempts per game.
The ratio that would seem to make the most sense for the Raiders offense would be about a 55% Run to 45% pass ratio. It is 8 games into the season and we have not run the ball on a consistent basis to alleviate some of the pressure off of AW and the O-line. To me this is another "common sense" type issue that is totally unacceptable.
Hey, what's going on with raidernews.com ?? I donsn't work for me.
How can we find out which of our younger players are "dead wood" with piss poor coaching?
I agree that coaching does not take full account for on-field mistakes like fumbling the snap, INT's, dropped passes, missed blocks and tackles, etc. But you know what neither do the players. Football is all about putting your guys in the right place to make a play. Part of that is play-calling. Part of that is the player.
In our case, we are seeing more mistakes like INT's, missed blocks and tackles, our QB getting sacked 9 times in a game because our play-calling is not putting our guys in a position to make a play. Where does that fall? On the player? NO! On the Offensive Coordinator! If your play calling is not putting your guys in a position to make plays, then the numbers (or lack thereof) will show it. CJ has given the numbers offensively, including how our sacks have risen tremendously in 1 year.
Now let's go to the last 2 years. Norv, love him or hate him, was coaching us offensively, and putting our players in a position to win. Our QB was making mental mistakes, and couldn't get us off the ground to succeed at those things. There were times when the play-calling could have been different and more aggressive; but the majority of that failure belonged to the lack of sense at the QB position. And it was not Ryan who wanted the 3-4, it was Norv Turner who wanted it. Ryan was saying all along that we didn't have the players to run the 3-4, and Norv tried to force the issue. That is where Norv messed up. Then last year, he realized we didn't have that talent, so he used both the 3-4 and the 4-3, but the priority was still the 3-4. Because that is what worked for the Cowboys under Jimmy Johnson, and that is the only style that Norv understands.
The Head Coach brings the style of defense/offense he wants to run; and the coordinators use that style to make it work. Art Shell has brought these playbooks to the Raiders, and he expects his coordinators to use the plays. Walsh is not utilizing the complete playbook to make this offense run. Shell has said it all year long. He recognizes that Walsh is not working out, but he is not going to embarrass a friend in the middle of the season. He is not going to burn his bridges. Walsh will be let go at the end of the year, and it will be done with class, dignity, and handled properly; in a way that reflects the Raiders' organization.
Do I agree with this? In part. I respect Shell's decision not to burn bridges, that is respectable. I think that it should have been a decision he didn't have to make, because Walsh should not have been there in the first place. If so, he should have been brought on as an assistant first, to get him back into the flow.
Raider Nate 75: I'm in agreement with you that this is more of a coaching issue than player issue.
However, I hope you're wrong about loyalties which may supersede implementing a winning system.
If what you say is true about Art's loyalty to Walsh, then isn't it still Art Shell's responsibility to field a competitive offense? We can't just abandoned the season, write-off eight games and chalk it up to loyalty. His loyalty should be to the Raiders and their fans, period. You're right, he should not have hired his "friend" to begin with. That's a recipe for disaster in any business relationship.
In keeping with his apparent loyalty to Walsh, Shell needs to step up as the head coach and either be more involved in the playcalling or have someone else, say Shoop, assist Walsh through the remainder of the season.
Let's face it, Walsh's resume doesn't look too impressive at this point.
nyraider,
I think Walsh needs to go Donald Rumsfeld and hand in his resignation, and save us all the trouble.
That way it is done respectable, classy, and doesn't burn bridges. He would be taking the responsibility for his failure, and save Shell the trouble at the end of the season; salvaging his friendship with Shell, and with the Raider Organization. They could then even bring him back as a coaching consultant to the team, and Art Shell.
That is what I'm hoping at this point; because as much as I want him out, Shell will not let him go mid-season.
I don't think it is loyalty, as much as it is not wanting to burn bridges; and ending on a bad note.
I will say this too, if they did fire him this week or next, I don't think Shoop would make an immediate impact either; and in a way I agree with this because I want Walsh out.
Shoop would have a better chance at Coordinator coming into a season, than mid-way through; interning for the position to be evaluated on for consideration. I think Shoop should have a fresh start, like Walsh did. So as much as I want to see Walsh go now, I also want to see Shoop with a fair chance. So in the long haul of it, it is better for Walsh to be gone at the end of the year.
Raider Nate 75: I believe we need to pull all the stops right now. Do whatever and whomever gives us the best head start on next season. If that means getting the young and inexperienced players more time, and realigning the coaching staff now, then let's see it.
I agree. I wouldn't expect Shoop or anyone else to come in and immediately make an impact. All the more reason to implement change now. The Raiders D seems like they could be on the cusp of something great, however, the ineptness of the offense (players and coaches) is really bringing all of us down.
I feel that I have been as patient as any fan, save maybe PantyRaider, but I don't think it's going out on a limb here to ask that something be done about the ridiculous playcalling and complete absence of even the most obvious halftime adjustments... game after game.
NYRaider,
I agree that something needs to be done. But I don't think firing Walsh (even though I too wish they would) at this point is going to help matters, only make them worse for the Raiders.
I think the only thing that is going to help the Raiders is for Shell to be interactive and start over-riding some of these plays offensively, giving the QB clipboard to Walsh, so he can take notes and learn.
He's got to do something before Al Davis gets up in the booth and starts calling the plays. But you know what, that may not be a bad thing either, because Davis coached the Raiders before he bought them, and took them from a laughable team (comparable to this season so far) to a 10 win team.
Hey RT,
I've opened my contribution for Raider Nation. You can catch it at:
http://raider-nate75.blogspot.com/
PR - You were missing '75' after raider-nate
http://raider-nate75.blogspot.com/
RN75 - I look forward to checking out your blog!
Ok, I’m done bitching about last week. It’s time to start gearing up for the Donkeys. This season can be salvaged with a couple wins in our division, and it doesn’t (wouldn’t) get any better than beating the Donkeys.
With all my frustrations, I’ve been hesitant to admit (even to myself) there were some positives from our offense last week (yes, it’s true):
1). We used a shotgun alignment (very un-Raider-like);
2). Walter used a silent snap-count (also very un-Raider-like);
3). We ran a hurry-up offense (not un-Raider-like, but very uncharacteristic of this year’s team).
Wow! Talk about progress.
Obviously, improvement in playcalling is requisite to this week’s game, but my biggest fear is that the coaches will overcompensate for last week’s shortcomings. For example, running the ball too much in a conservative game plan compared to last week’s shoot-fest may be a recipe for disaster. I think overcompensating is where a lot of our problems stem from week to week. First on my wish list, besides implementing a balanced run/pass offense, is to GET JERRY PORTER IN THE GAME!!! He’s way too good (and cocky) to leave on the sideline.
I know a lot of West-Coasters, particularly Bay-area dwellers, saw the forty-whiners’ game as the ultimate must-win game this year, but for those who don’t live in that area, beating the Donkeys is a must-win to get back in the Black (and Silver).
Bama7
It all points right back to Al. I think Raider00 said it (not sure), but whoever did was right: Shell hired Walsh to run Al's verticle game. Al hired Shell to run the verticle game. I'm starting to not hate Walsh and Shell so bad, I mean they're just doing what they agreed to do which is run an antiquated, 70's Raider offense. Al has been slamming his head against the wall for the better part of the last twenty years running this offense that defenses caught up to a long time ago. It DOES NOT WORK! Be it Harlow or Simms, Simms or Gallery, Hostetler or Walter, Collins or Shroeder, Whitted or Jett... it DOES NOT MATTER. Defenses caught up to this offense circa 1987 and by 1997 they were as adept at stopping it as penicillin is to the clap. Now, it's 2006 and the match up is so lopsided as to be flat out embarrassing.
It's Al. I blame the whole thing on Al. He is a stubborn ass that will not admit that it doesn't work anymore. And he's stuck because if he had fired Shell or Walsh earlier he'd look stupid for hiring 'em in the first place and if he fires 'em now he still looks stupid for hiring 'em in the first place. Plus he has to know by now that his Lamonica veticle game no longer works so he can't can Walsh and try a new scheme becuase Walsh will surely just rat and say "that's what he wanted me to run." The old man is trapped in his own ineptitude and his legend falls further every day. Sad.
Another botched job: Huff is a great FREE SAFETY, not a strong safety. Al is gong to get this kid killed in the SS spot. Al's stupid for bringing in two good free safetys. What now?
Another botched job: Whitted is just the latest version of Al's incessant need to recreate Cliff Branch. Hester, Howard, Jett blah blah blah.
Brayton was his attempt to recreate Hendricks. Failure.
Al is a stubborn old man that is unable to evolve any further in the nfl
finis
Hello faida fanatics of all the countries in the "faida nation" you're all probably waiting for my guiding wisdom in relation to the upcomming "shell-lacking" that will be administered to the faidas this Sun. by the DENVER BRONCOS, If your LOSER team is lucky "andthrew falter" will only be sacked 7 or 8 times this week. I wouldn't count on it though, figure on seeing a little of "tuiawfulsoslow" and "our miss brooks" at the helm after "falter" has had enough. "faida national" out, just don't give up baby" 2-14, "the autumn wind is a pirate".
What happened to that commercial, "the autumn wind is a pirate"? It's autumn, and the faidas think that they're pirates, why don't you change the name of the team to the "chokeland pirates"? Kinda catchy don't you think? "faida national" out, just hope against hope baby, 2-14.
Bama 7 -
The word that you used which is a key to a productive offense is 'balance'.
The Raiders offense and offensive game plan needs to be sensible balance in the run/pass ratio. There needs to be a balance between short, intermediate, and long passes. There needs to be a balance in passing the ball to all of the viable receiving options (WRs, TE, RBs). There needs to be a balance of throwing and running on 1st down. There needs to be a balance in 1,3,5,7 step drops.
Along with the balancing act of utilizing different offensive weapons and playcalling, there needs to be a logical sense and willingness to adapt to what is working throughout the game.
One of the more disturbing aspects of Walsh's playcalling on MNF was that going into the game, it was obvious that the Raiders intended to be pass heavy. I don't fault this initial game plan. What I do fault is that Walsh seemed to be so locked into this game plan that there seemed to be an unwillingness on his part to change the plan as the game progressed.
The other aspect of the MNF playcalling that is equally troubling has to do w/Shell. Doesn't Shell and Walsh communicate throughout the game. Why wouldn't Shell suggest to Walsh to call more running plays? Isn't that one of the reasons that HC's have a head-set on? Further, down 13-0 at half time, wouldn't the distorted pass/run ratio and lack of success be the basis for the offensive coaches making the appropriate adjustments? This seeming lack of communication, common sense, and ability to adjust ultimately rests on Shell's shoulders. One of his primary duties as HC is to manage the game and his personnel.
Calico,
I hear what your saying about balance, but...
If you were a Defensive Coordinator, facing the Raiders, what would you really be worried about.
Would the backfield of slow Jordan, & 5 carries a game, Fargas give you any sleepless nights ?
How bout rookie Qb Walter, with no time to throw ? No worries there.
The offensive line, & TE's are a total joke.
WR's ??? The only guy that USED to scare people, Moss, suddenly acts as if the ball is a sharp object.
So you want some balance, fine, but this offense is a complete wreck.
By the way, Bama 7, that was me who made the statement about Al begot Art, and Art begot Walsh, and Al, Art, & Walsh begot the worst Raider offense that I can remember,(with a big helping hand from the players, of course).
Raider 00 -
I know that DCs lick their chops going into games against our O. You are right. Each position group is subpar. The unit is a complete wreck but wouldn't you agree that the goal of achieving a more balanced offense would make it less of a wreck?
The points about balance, sensible playcalling, and common sense game plans is that it is the foundation for any potential offensive success. In other words, put the players in schemes and call plays that give them the best chance to succeed. You need to do the former to increase the chances of the latter. For example, if a TE seam route is called and the O-line gives AW time, and AW throws a perfect strike BUT Anderson drops the ball, would you keep using this play? You bet. The expectation is that Anderson should and will catch the next attempt or another TE will be given the same opportunity.
Rushing attack:
The problem: We don't run the ball enough (25 carries per game).
The Raiders have run the ball fairly well all season long (4.2 per carry).
Solution: Stick with the rushing attack on a consistent, 60 minute basis. Establish an identity. Establish the unit's toughness. Do something that the O-line can take pride in. Give our D a breather. Cut AW some slack from running for his life. It's not rocket science.
Even if the Raiders weren't running the ball effectively, this still should be a primary staple in the offense. Just like other facets of the game that are of prime importance, the rushing attack would be stengthened and developed when done a consistent basis.
Passing Attack:
The Problem: Poor pass protection, bad playcalling (too many long read and react patterns), too many drop passes.
The Solution: Continue to use the Shotgun on an ocassional basis, work on screens and flairs, use more 3 step slants and crossing patterns REGARDLESS of whether or not the receivers drop the ball.
Final point about the poor execution:
All of the individual skill players (QB, RB, WRs, TEs) and the O-line (collectively and individually) are capable of success. It really comes down to a sensible game plan AND the players performing to the best of their abilities.
Calico,
In your last paragraph you say, "All individial skill players, & the O-line, are capable of success. It comes down to a sensibl game plan, AND players performing to the best of their abilities".
But what if some of these players are playing to the best of their abilities already ?
It's not as if Gallery, Grove, Walker, Whitted, Anderson, & Jordan, were once all pro's, and now, suddenly, have regressed.
The horror we are watching each week from these guys may be the best they are capable of.
As an example, I'll focus in on the O-line.
Gallery, Grove, & Walker, are playing poorly, but have we ever seen them playing at a higher level then this ??
I, for one, have not.
Would it surprise you if C. Anderson Dudley dropped 10 passes in a row ??
It wouldn't surprise me. As far as I can recall, he's never been any good.
Beyond the power structure of Davis, Shell, & Walsh at the top, there is a deeper problem with the offense.
There are many players on this roster that serve no other purpose then to take up space.
This has been a problem for many years now with the Raiders, and until this culture is broken, and real football players are brought in to take their places, things will not be improving any time soon.
At the conclusion of this season, I expect the Raiders to waive, Whitted, Anderson, Walker, Gibson, Gallery, Grove, Jordan, R. Williams,(sadly signed to extention), & Brooks.
I also expect Moss, & Porter to be traded away.
If this happens, I will have a glimmer of hope. If not, I will no they are not serious yet, and will expect more of the same nonsense of this year.
yeezy boost 350
lebron 16
vans shoes
nike roshe
coach handbags
yeezy boost 350 v2
nhl jerseys
lacoste polo
ralph lauren uk
off white nike
20181212xixi888
Post a Comment
<< Home