2007 Schedule and Mini Takes
-The 2007 regular season schedule has been announced, and we won't see a division rival in Oakland until the Chiefs come to town on October 21, preceded only by the Lions to start the season on September 9, followed by the Browns a few weeks later. Kind of a strange schedule, but I'll take it. It sure beats March Madness and hockey season.
-The Raider Image is billing its authentic Barry Sims jerseys as "new." Guess Barry Sims still figures prominently into our plans. Still no Andrew Walter jerseys, though. Why?
-Speaking of Walter, he's the only quarterback on our depth chart at the moment to have taken a regular season snap in the NFL. Think we have some personnel work to do on that front?
-Check out Rookiepedia.com. It's a new web site based on the Wikipedia concept, dedicated to NFL draft prospects. It's a great place to research players and bolster your draft analysis.
-The Raider Image is billing its authentic Barry Sims jerseys as "new." Guess Barry Sims still figures prominently into our plans. Still no Andrew Walter jerseys, though. Why?
-Speaking of Walter, he's the only quarterback on our depth chart at the moment to have taken a regular season snap in the NFL. Think we have some personnel work to do on that front?
-Check out Rookiepedia.com. It's a new web site based on the Wikipedia concept, dedicated to NFL draft prospects. It's a great place to research players and bolster your draft analysis.
posted by Raider Take at 10:56 AM
51 Comments:
Go Andrew! It's your birthday!
Go Andrew! It's your birthday!
from Rookiepedia-
"In the combine, Brady Quinn threw the ball 70 yards, then Jamarcus threw Brady 70 yards on one knee"
...too funny
hmm ... that's the kind of stuff I guess I should be moderating... :D
No Monday night games. We truly are starting over this year.
Yes, and for the first six weeks of the season, we get to see only the Lions and Browns at home. No night games, all games on Sundays. As far as I can tell, there's not one nationally televised game on the schedule.
WOW! Not one prime time game. That has to be a first.
I still can't figure out how it is that we play both SB teams AGAIN!
Also, how is it that we have the worst record in 2006 and the second toughest schedule in 2007(Buffalo is first)?
Hard to believe this S#@% is merely happenstance.
Well, since I live on the South (Charleston, SC) where we get Panther, Falcon, and some Jags games, it looks like I might only get to see one game this year. And that's if they decide to show the Jax/Oak game late in the year. :( I could end up not seeing a single game this year. Maybe I'll break down and get DirectTV.
NY Raider, do you not understand the NFL Scheduling process after all these years? Do you not realize, that not only do the Raiders play the two Super Bowl teams again, but also the ENTIRE AFC West plays both Super Bowl teams? At least we get Indy and Chicago at our place, Denver and KC have to visit both Indy and Chicago.
And just take the strength of schedule with a grain of salt. When you are a 2-14 team and you happen to be playing a 14-2 team, not once, but twice the next season, well of course the numbers game states that you are going to have a very tough schedule. This years schedule was determined back in 2002!!! There is no conspiracy against the Raiders. In my opinion Raider fans are at their worst when they are crying about the schedule. I sure hope the players dont feel the way that some of these fans do, or they will be defeated before opening kickoff.
Let me get this straight, the schedule in no way is supposed to account for recent performance? The best teams can have the weaker schedules, and the worst teams can have the hardest schedules? This is parity? And if all of this was decided five years ago, then why all the announcements about opponents and schedules? It would have already been common knowledge once 2006 was in the books.
According to the SF Chronicle: "The 2006 season wasn't kind to the Raiders, and the 2007 schedule isn't cutting them any breaks, either. Along with the Buffalo Bills, they are saddled with the toughest schedule statistically in the NFL this season."
I'm not saying it's a conspiracy. I am saying it's bogus and incompatible with the alleged parity of the NFL and related systems such as the bad teams getting high draft picks, and vice versa.
Yes, I'm crying about the schedule. Sorry. But I'm a fan of consistency and logic.
Raider Take, the schedules are determined years in advance, and all opponents are determined through the 2009 season. I can rattle off the Raiders opponents for 2008 and 2009 if you want me to. 14 of our 16 games are predetermined, and the remaining two games will be against conference opponents that finish in the same place in their division, as we do in our division (for example this year we are playing 2006 last place teams, Cleveland and Miami) It just so turns out that our opponents have a combined .539 winning percentage from 2006 and that will happen when you have TWO games scheduled against a team that went 14-2 the previous year. Had we won a few more games and divisonal games last season, the Raiders would not be be in this predicament. It boggles my mind how so many Raider fans still do not know how the system works.
But what if I want to remain a willfully ignorant conspiracy theorist? It's a free country! Please quit making so much damned sense.
How about us having to start the season against the Super Bowl champion Patriots in New England in 2005, and two weeks later having to return to the east coast to play the Super Bowl runner-up Eagles after winning just four games the previous year? The opponents may have been predetermined, but how about that scheduling?
Regardless of how it's preconfigured, something is wrong when a team that has won 11 games over three straight years has to play both Super Bowl teams (none of whom are in their division) in each of the succeeding campaigns to those three years.
Thanks, I'm going to go grab my pacifier now.
I really don't care who we play, or when or where we play'em.
The key is not who we play, but rather who plays for us.
We could play the Lions 16 times, but if Randall Williams & Courtney Anderson take the field with balls bouncing off their hands & heads, what does it really matter ?
Once we get some good players, I say bring on all comers.
Here's a take I wrote in September of 2005, thought you guys might find it amusing:
_______
This makes me want to puke. In an article published this week, Sports Illustrated asks you to shed a tear for the Patriots because they are supposedly getting screwed by the league's schedule makers. That's right, winning three out of the last four Super Bowls isn't enough. Now we have to feel sorry for them, too.
Under the headline "The Patriots gear up for arguably the toughest five-game regular-season stretch in the history of the NFL," the article states: "No other NFL team has ever had a five-game run in which four games were on the road and the five opponents averaged 11 wins or better in the previous season...That brutal slate of games has some New England players thinking there's a conspiracy against them."
Wasn't it the Raiders who had to travel across the country to play the Super Bowl champs on opening night? When is the last time a 5-11 team opened the following season's first three weeks with two non-divisional cross-country road games against AFC and NFC conference champions? Never, that's when. That is, until the Oakland Raiders got their 2005 schedule.
But there are no excuses in the Raider Nation. We'll leave the crying to the Patriots and Sports Illustrated.
____
P.S. I guess I should take my old advice about making excuses, eh?
But Raider Take, the entire AFC West division has to play both Super Bowl teams for four straight years, why do you act like it is just the Raiders that have to do that? San Diego and Oakland get to host Indy and Chicago while Denver and Kansas City have to travel to Indy and Chicago. Can you imagine the whining and crying going on in Denver and Kansas City right now, because their teams have to hit the road against the Super Bowl teams from 2006? And, I guess I was in the minority on this one, but Jerry McDonald seems to agree with me, is that when we played the Patriots back in 2005, week one was the PERFECT time to play them during the season. We got to get our road game in Foxboro out of the way while it was still summer time and before Gillette froze over. We got to play the Pats before they were hitting on all cyllinders and before Brady got into his mid season stride. This was our first game featuring Lamont Jordan, Randy Moss and Derrick Burgess, and therefore the Patriots had no film on the "newly revamped" 2005 Raiders. Going on to their turf in primetime to open up the 2005 campaign and hopefully coming away with a "w" would have been an awesome way to open up that season. But I guess I was the only one that felt that way, since Al and Norv had to bitch about it, and their whiny attitude probably trickled down to the players. Dont show fear, and dont complain, and you play the hand that is dealt to you. To be the best you have to beat the best, I say bring em all on, I wish weeks 1 and 2 were against Indy and Chicago, I would love to see how we stacked up against them, and see how Lane coached against the two best teams from 2006.
So what was the Super Bowl champion Patriots' excuse (and SI's) for bitching about their 2005 schedule?
On their web site at this very moment, the Colts have the gall to say this under the headline TOUGH START: "The Colts will open the season with three match-ups against AFC South opponents in the first six games...'That’s a difficult stretch, opening up (that way) on the road, Dungy said...TOUGH STRETCHES: The Colts three times in 2007 will play back-to-back road games, up from two such scenarios last season."
Just like the Super Bowl champion Patriots two years ago, crying about their schedule! I kid you not, they're throwing a tantrum about having to travel from Indiana to the South three out of six weeks (to play the Texans and Titans, no less!). Check it out at Colts.com.
Yet I can't cry about my 2-14 team having the second toughest schedule out of 32 teams?
Comparitively, playing on the road, 3,000 miles away, two out of the season's first three weeks against the two Super Bowl contestants as we did in 2005 will NEVER be okay for ANY 5-11 team. But that's water under the bridge.
I understand your point about the formula. I get it. Our opponents (but not the schedule) are largely determined by the formula. Our division rivals have to play many of these same teams according to the formula. Doesn't mean I have to like it. The formula obviously sucks, because it doesn't serve the interests of parity or logic.
Raider Take, you are crying about having the 2nd toughest schedule when it just so happens, that it just turned out that way by mere coincedence!!!! Next year we go up against the AFC East and the NFC South, and guess what? if those two divisions in 2007 have all have winning teams and each produce 3 playoff teams apiece, wel then next year we are going to play a very tough schedule too! The forumula is perfect for rotation of teams, get over it dude. I guess you would rather play the Cardinals, Lions and Texans for 16 weeks.
Yeah. I get it Anon 6:08! It still sucks. My biggest complaint is that we have NO prime time games. If I lived in Oakland, I’d have season tickets; but I don’t. I live in a market that gets peppered with Giants, Jets, Bills and Patriots.... no matter what their records or playoff chances.
So, I’m relegated to visit my local tavern with DirectTV, despite the fact that I don’t really drink (particularly on Sundays). Yes, I much prefer the bliss of my own home (equipped with wide screen HD) and perhaps a few of my die-hard Raider fan friends.
Mine is simply a knee jerk reaction about the schedule based on what you call coincidence. IMHO, it’s time to pull a Tanya Harding on the schedule-makers.
The 9ers have one of the weakest schedules at .469 opponent win percentage.
The Raiders is one of the toughest at .539.
You know what the difference is? If we had won all our division games our opponent's win percentage would be .445 (that's not exactly right, because we wouldn't draw Cleveland and Miami if we won 6 more games).
In other words, our schedule is so difficult because we sucked rocks in the division last year. Plain and simple.
Storminator
hey anon, put your money where your mouth is, and rattle off our opponents for '08 and '09; plus give us the source where you found these opponents to prove your claim. i'm placing money now, that you cannot, since none of these "opponents" have been made known to the public. so unless you work for the league, and can prove it to all of us by sharing your information (which could cost you your job with the league), i think you're full of it.
you can guess who they are just like the rest of us.
oh yeah, rattling off the cheats, dolts, and doncos for 6 games, doesn't count as knowledge because everyone knows we play them twice a year.
"Raider Nate 75 said...
oh yeah, rattling off the cheats, dolts, and doncos for 6 games, doesn't count as knowledge because everyone knows we play them twice a year."
2008 opponents:
AFC West: Chiefs, Broncos, Chargers 2 games each
AFC East: Patriots, Jets, Bills, Miami 1 game each
NFC South: Saints, Falcons, Panthers, Bucs 1 game each
That's 14 games, last 2 will be the teams in AFC North and South that match our division ranking.
2009 opponents:
AFC West: Chiefs, Broncos, Chargers 2 games each
AFC North: Ravens, Bengals, Steelers, Browns 1 game each
NFC East: Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, Eagles 1 game each
That's 14 games, last 2 will be the teams in AFC East and South that match our division ranking.
Storminator
Well, all of this makes the scheduling complaints of the Super Bowl Champion Patriots and Super Bowl Champion Colts pretty laughable, doesn't it.
Raider Nate and all you others who want to know the mystery of NFL scheduling....
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=11638
On a happier note....
Kiffin confirmed wide receiver Calvin Johnson of Georgia Tech had visited the facility and said quarterback JaMarcus Russell would be in Alameda soon. No telling what coaches really think this time of year, but it was interesting Kiffin, when extolling the virtues of Johnson, finished his sentence by saying, "He's perfect."
I'm done debating everyone's speculations. Only 2 weeks from the "Decision".
Absolutely.
I hate this time of year. There's nothing to talk about! Frenzy on the schedule!
Storminator
OK usually I'm pretty pissed off every year when the schedule comes out. I certainly understand all the bitterness. But I gotta' say, I felt like we got off fairly easy this year. Playing a couple of poor teams early gives us a chance to get some of our confidence back and set a good tone for the new Kiffin era. It does get rough toward the end of the year but hopefully by then our run D has gelled, and we at least make some progress with the offense. I think the Chargers got it way worse than us. They start:
Chicago
@ N.E.
@ G.B.
K.C.
@ Donkos
Then they get US after our bye. Hopefully they drop some significant games and lose confidence in Norv early. Hell maybe WE even drop them early and really shake things up! All I'm saying is, for once I don't feel like the NFL schedule makers are out to get me.
-Psycho- (Forgot my password)
Psycho-
I'm with you. We start off against Detroit, followed by Denver, Cleveland, Miami, and then a bye. I like our chances and think this will give us an opportunity to smooth out kinks in the offensive system being put in place. Sure, the schedule gets tougher in the second half of the season, but by then we should be functioning as a competitive unit if all goes according to plan.
The schedule allows us to baby step up to where we need to be and I, for one, like it.
Here's a thought. I think I figured out why we always play the two Super Bowl teams. Since the basic teams we play are set in stone way ahead of time, it can only mean one thing. Every year, probably around week #17, there is a secret 'Screw the Raiders' meeting in the NFL head office. Among the attendees are Marty Shittenheimer, Shinyhand, Franco Harris, Tom Brady, Lyttle, Pete Rozelle, Don Shula, all of the refs, you get the picture by now.
They all look at the Raiders schedule for the following year and pick the two best playoff teams from THIS year on that schedule. They then plot & scheme, and 'pull strings' throughout the playoffs to be sure those two teams make it to the Super Bowl.
There HAS been a lot of fishy stuff going on throughout the years, but this one has to be pure coincidence that we always play the two SB teams. Luck of the draw.
-Psycho-
The deal is this: We get virtually the same oponents as the Donkeys, the Dolts, and the Chefs. The difference is that each of them get to play the 2-14 Raiders which is why the difficulty of their schedule isn't as hard as ours. In other words, the 14-2 Dolts don't have the 14-2 Dolts on their schedule. When trying to determine the difficulty of schedule versus other years, you have to eliminate your own division because you play each of them twice every year. The combined record for oponents outside of our division is 73-87 for a .456 winning percentage.
PS:
Under this formula, the way teams get screwed is not in which teams they play, but when. The only time I really griped about it (I can't remember the year exactly) is when the league had us play three consecutive weeks in the East in 18 days.
That's a good point Blandarocked. We play in a tough division, so our schedule is by extension, tough.
It just pains me to see we have ZERO prime time exposure, which can only mean we've become the new Lions of the NFL? Doh!
Blanda, Good stats. I figured as much, but there was way too much match involved for me to make an effort. :)
I did do this however. I'm just looking at our NFC opponents by year to show it is just bad luck ending up playing both SB teams. The AFC teams are a little more complicated because you play one full non-AFC West division and two additional non-AFC West teams. You know I hate math so I didn't get into it.
2002 NFC West
2003 NFC North
2004 NFC South
2005 NFC East
2006 NFC West
2007 NFC North
2008 NFC South
2009 NFC East
2010 NFC West
etc...
-Psycho-
Regardless, I still say "conspiracy" because the post-season in all sports (baseball, football, basketball, and college sports) are fixed by the gamblers.
Examples (other than the Raiders getting screwed by the refs), this past football playoffs; the Patriots had a 21 point lead, and lost. When was the last time they did that in the post season? Let's be honest, never in the Tom Brady era. I think they went up 21 just to prove they could beat the Colts.
Baseball-No team had ever won a post season 7 game series down 3 games to none. That is until the Red Sox did it in '04; against the Yankees.
Basketball and College sports are definitely fixed, and easy to fix. I don't have to mention boxing.
So if you look at it from that stand point, it's a conspiracy.
So where can I get my Andrew Walter jersey?
And is it Walter, Booty and Otis or bust, or do we have some tricks up our sleeve (Russell being the most obvious one)?
RT:
I'm starting to feel very confident that it's going to be Russell. I think that if the Raiders really wanted to hand the team to a veteran, they'd have done it by now so that he could be in voluntary camps.
Either the Raiders are expecting huge offers as draft day approaches, or they are comfortable with the idea of Walter and Russell/Quinn.
Down to Walter and a Rookie, I think that Kiffin is comfortable with working with a kid just out of college because he's a blank slate. Walter needs to unlearn bad habits developed last season before he can begin.
If the Raiders truly were interested in somebody like McCown, they wouldn't be afraid to trade the first pick for somebody like him and additional draft choices. They don't have somebody who gives them confidence at the QB spot, and they appear to be saving their money and their No. 1 overall pick. 1+1=2.
blanda - make that 1+1=30 million.
IMO, it's hard to complain too much about a schedule that gives us EIGHT non-playoff teams... Det, Minn, Clev, Miami, Hous, Tenn, Jac, and GB; and starts us out with Det, Clev, and Miami in the first four games.
Gary,
I agree. Let's just suck it up and win some games already.
It starts with the roster, not the schedule.
Once we have better players, we can compete with anyone.
It's better to judge yourself against the best, not the worst.
Hell, we almost beat SD, & Denv. last year and we were a total mess.
Ok, I'll bite. Forget the schedule of teams. As aptly pointed out, it just doesn’t matter. We can play the Colts 16 games in a row, and our expectations shouldn’t be any different... we expect to win.
What should open ours eyes is the complete lack of respect we now receive from the NFL schedule-makers and their media contracts (sponsorships) that dictate national televised games. All of the sudden, we – arguably the most marketable team in NFL history – are not marketable! That’s a real slap in the face IMO. Ready for another B-slap? 49ers have four national games.
Perhaps it is a conspiracy that we don’t have any national televised prime time games. Could it be the NFL is fed up with Al Davis suing them repeatedly? Right or wrong, it has to get old for the league as a whole. I don’t pretend to understand the NFL’s revenue-sharing, but this probably doesn’t bode well for being able to afford the #1 draft pick, particularly a QB.
This is not football related at the moment. My wife and I are already blessed with a daughter "Raider Abi" who is 18 months, and we have recently learned that we are having a boy, due September 1st! His name is Caleb Paul. I already have a Silver and Black outfit to put him in. Just in time for him to see his first Raider game against the Lions, and it WILL BE A WIN!!!!!!
Raider Nate, congrats from me and Mini Take, who arrived into the Raider Nation shortly after last year's draft. This is one way to grow the fan base!
Raider Nate - Congratulations!
Gary - Make that 9 non-playoff teams if you add Denver to your list.
NY Raider - Although we would all love to see the Raiders have some nationally televised games, frankly, we don't deserve it.
4-12, 5-11, 4-12, 2-14; 4 straight years of piss poor performance. We will earn our respect from the media, T.V. networks, and critics when we begin to win our fair share of games and put a better product on the field. Until then, the complaining & whining about the schedule, the lack of national t.v. games, the conspiracies, falls on deaf ears.
Of course conspiracy talk falls on deaf ears, that's what makes it a conspiracy! Roswell, the Grassy Knoll, the Raiders...Sorry, I have to run now, I've got to finish coating my windows in tin foil.
raidernate 75:
Congratulations on the new baby that is coming!
Calico Jack:
You are 100% correct, we don't deserve and from a 2-14 record are not ready for primetime!
Like the saying goes "build it and they will come" the same thing holds true if we start winning they will come and they will say how great our team is!
raiderdecoachella
Raidernate! Congrats! Quaterback? Draft class of 2029?
Calico is right. The Raiders don't deserve prime time. However, I'd like to point out that the Raiders can still earn prime time for the 2007 season. If they play well, and stand in the way of a division rival making the playoffs, you can expect one of their games to be transferred to Sunday night.
http://www.examiner.com/a-671822~Raiders_
handcuffed_to_awkward_situation.html
glenn dickey makes sense folks!
Okay, so you guys are accepting that the 49ers have risen so far through the ranks to deserve four prime time games to our zero? Fellows come on. This is like the scene in Animal House when Bluto gives his speech... Nitermyer? Deadman!
Despite our record over the past few years, it’s hard for me to believe our national marketability just fell off the table. Listen, we have the intrigue of a rookie head coach and the number one draft pick, not to mention the lingering stigmas from previous coaching going back to Gruden. Plus, people love to hate the Raiders. They tune in just to see what the Raiders will do next, even if it’s to watch them fall on their face. That’s money too. Hell, we should be one of the first teams on the national schedule.
I’ve been to my share of Raider games in Buffalo, NJ (Giants, Jets), Cinn, and Oakland. Without exception, Raider fans are in large numbers and let themselves be known. Even during our down period, I sat with a group of Raider fans at a Buffalo game that absolutely intimidated Bills fans.
IMHO, Raiders remain highly marketable on a national level and should not be shunned from prime time.
Congratulations Raider Nate. Doesn’t get any better than that!
PS sorry about the rant, but it is a slow news day.
Slow news day? The signing of OG Cooper Carlisle last night was HUGE!
Calico Jack's O-Line projection:
LT Sims
LG Carlisle
C Newberry
RG Boothe
RT Gallery
Calico:
>>>
Gary - Make that 9 non-playoff teams if you add Denver to your list.
>>>
Doh! This is actually one of the easier schedules we have had for many years. Statistics sometimes lie.
>>>
NY Raider - Although we would all love to see the Raiders have some nationally televised games, frankly, we don't deserve it.
>>>>
Not to mention that we were BLOWN OUT in our two Monday night games last year... that was some boring ass garbage we put forth last season at times.
Still kinda curious because I'd think that casual fans still like to watch Raider games at times... if nothing else, for the fans. As someone else said, I'd be surprised if we don't get picked up for a Sunday night game if we start playing well... especially if Russell starts lighting it up.
CJ, I stand corrected.
That's news for sure. Carlisle brings an understanding of the cut blocking schemes used by the Donkeys that we will now employ. Clearly, one of the best FA signings to date.
Scorpio-
I hate to say it, but Dickey's article does make some sense.
Calico - Yeah I was really hoping for Carlisle. Good pick-up. Newberry sounds like his knees are holding up so your line should be IT assuming we don't draft an absolute stud like Ryan Kalil, Blaylock, or whoever.
-Psycho-
Post a Comment
<< Home