Dust Off Your Bulletin Boards
While many in the media are hedging their bets against the Raiders, acknowledging that the team looks improved, our friends at Sports Illustrated just can't help themselves, predicting today that the Raiders will go 3-13 in 2008 and will occupy the cellar of the AFC West, trailing the Chiefs by two wins.
In other words, despite only having to play seven games this year against teams that Sports Illustrated projects to have winning records, the Raiders will regress in 2008.
In fact, only one team, the Falcons, will lose more games than the Raiders. All other teams in the NFL, including the 49ers, Dolphins and Lions, will win five or more games.
Thanks to SI, once again, for some excellent bulletin board material.
In other words, despite only having to play seven games this year against teams that Sports Illustrated projects to have winning records, the Raiders will regress in 2008.
In fact, only one team, the Falcons, will lose more games than the Raiders. All other teams in the NFL, including the 49ers, Dolphins and Lions, will win five or more games.
Thanks to SI, once again, for some excellent bulletin board material.
posted by Raider Take at 10:04 AM
104 Comments:
HE LIVES!!!
Welcome back RT.
Psycho
RT, where ya been? It makes my day to see you pipe in. The comment portion of your blog misses your insight.
Well, at least we know one of our 3 wins will surely come against the Donkos next week. I don't think there is any way they beat us.
Psycho
I haven't read a Sports Illustrated in 10-15 years. More importantly where in the hell have you been bud?
Good to see you're still alive.
H
Psycho,
A week from next Monday. September 8th. Don't want you to show up at the wrong time.
H
RT!
Man, buddy. You had us worried!
Good to have you back.
BTW, for everyone who didn't see it, here's the link that shows us in teh cellar.
http://cgi.cnnsi.com/2008/football/nfl/specials/preview/2008/08/26/main/index.html
"PANTS-ON-HEAD RETARDED"!
was the writer who wrote this piece for si wearing a swimsuit ??
just curious.
The good news: Oddsmakers at Sportsbook.com are so sure the Oakland Raiders are going to win more than 6 games during the 2008 regular NFL season, they have made the OVER 6 wins a -145 favorite. The bad news is this doesn't mean they will necessarily go .500 on the season.
Oh, and let me try that link again:
http://cgi.cnnsi.com/2008
/football/nfl/specials/preview/
2008/08/26/main/index.html
When your money is on the line, always go with Vegas over the Haters. Vegas makes a lot more money than the Haters, because it doesn't confuse rational thinking with negative emotion.
Hypathetical scenario - You're stranded on a small island, naked, with no toilet paper and no plants other than spikey pineapples and poison ivy.
You just took a huge dump and your wiping options are:
a) Radioactive sand from nuclear testing
b) Box Jelly Fish
c) Copy of Sports Illustrated (Tom Brady on cover)
d) Hand full of rusty razor blades
***************
Personally I'd go with either the jelly fish or razor blades.
Psycho
What is so bad about what SI said? The Raiders will probably win from somewhere between 3-5 games this season. The OL is going to get Russell killed and the DL still cannot stop the run. 3 wins at worst and 5 wins at best for this team.
RT, I was beginning to think that you didn't love us anymore and had abandoned us forever.
Welcome back, dude. You can tell how much your absence upset Psycho. He missed two century posts in a row.
We're not on speaking terms, RT.
Blanda,
Please tell RT about how I think we're going to kill the Donkos next week (Monday after next, H).
Psycho
Anon, you ask what is wrong with what SI predicted? What's wrong is predicting that the Raiders will be the second-to-worst team in the NFL, when, in fact, they aren't even the worst team in their division.
Psycho,
You drink a beer, go swimming and use the SI cover with Brady to start a fire with driftwood. After all, you're at the beach.
H
Anon,
We're not even the 3rd worst team in our division. A week from Monday (thanks H) we'll prove it.
H,
I forgot there was beer. Honestly dude, if I had to be stuck on an island with one person, it would be you, because you're the only person I know who brews his own beer and knows the Raiders. Aw never mind, ,it would be Jessica Alba!
Psycho
How do you know the Raiders are not the worst team in the AFC West? No matter what kind of teams they both field, the Raiders and Chiefs have historically played some very very close football games over the years. The Raiders are in no way a lock to sweep the Chiefs this season. In fact, I think the Raiders will drop the week 2 game at Arrowhead. KC seems to have their number more often than not, as evidenced by the fact that KC holds the all time winning record over the Raiders. Look at how bad the Chiefs were last season, and they still managed to win in Oakland 12-10. The Raiders should have swept them last season.
Like I said, tune in a week from Monday (thanks H) for your proof that we're not the "worst team in the AFC West".
And if you think the Chefs are better than the Donkos (Or the Raiders for that matter), you're either dillusional or you're a fake fan.
Is that you Patsy fan? He said he'd stay out until August, but you can never trust a Patsy fan (sorry if you're a real Raiders fan. I take that back, you're still dilusional).
Psycho
Welcome back RT.
Anon:
In reference to the SI prediction of 3 wins, take a brief moment to think rationally and consider the following:
The winning percentage of the Raiders first 12 opponents is .395. The only playoff team the Raiders face in the first 12 games is SD once. IMO, six wins in the first 12 games would be a reasonable expectation. That alone is more than double the predicted wins by the SI writer.
Just ask yourself a few basic questions:
Is this year's team more talented than last year's team which won 4 games?
IMO, without a doubt especially at the most important position in football, QB.
If journeyman 2nd stringer McCown and physically hobbled Culpepper can put together 4 wins ... what the hell do you think Russell is capable of doing?
If last year's team was the sixth best rushing team in the NFL ... what do you think this year's squad is capable of doing on the ground with the addditions of McFadden and Bush?
Our secondary is leaps and bounds better than last year's team. The additions of Wilson and Hall, the move of Huff to FS plus all pro caliber Asomugha makes this arguably the best secondary in football.
I won't waste my breath on giving you a line item list of all the other reasons I think the 3 win prediction is laughable. Frankly, you are not worth the time.
I will only say simply the following statement:
Only an ignorant person like yourself would think that the 08 team which is more talented than the 07 team AND plays a far easier schedule would lose more games.
At the very low end of predictions I would put the Raiders at 5 wins. At the high end 9.
3 wins? Give me a FN break.
I am sorry, 3 wins could very well happen, nothing surprises me anymore with the Silver and Black. I am sure the Raiders never in a million years thought they would go 2-14 back in 2006 when Art Shell was supposed to bring the "nasty" back. The Raiders are severly lacking on the OL and DL and everyone knows that football games are won and lost in the trenches. Al loves his shiny new toys (the skill postition players) but every season he seems to neglect the big uglies in the trenches. Russell is going to be running for his life this season, and combine that with the fact that he is basically a rookie working with what may be the worst corps of WR's in the NFL and three wins this year would not be out of the realm. I think 3-13 would be a worst case scenario for the Raiders and right now I have them pegged at around the 5-11 or 6-10 mark.
Anon, the thing is, SI's predictions aren't pegged as worst case scenarios. Otherwise, they wouldn't predict the Dolphins to win 6 games this year. Do you think that 6 victories is the worst case scenario for the Dolphins? Or that 7 wins is the worst case scenario for the Lions? Or 5 wins for the Niners? Of course not.
That's my point here. It's called the bias of Hate.
SI grades other teams by ostensibly balancing their worst and best case scenarios, yet insists that the Raiders will totally implode. So much for objectivity.
P.S. Thanks for the welcome backs, friends. I'll try to unplug myself from life support.
C.J. is on he money. Even if you are minutely objective let's look at the facts. Raider D is much improved with a run stopper at SS and Tommy Kelly back. The running game which was one of the best in the league last year is even better. The QB situation (which was a joke last year)is now addressed. The sched is much less demanding. The division seems weaker. So where does 3 wins come from? B.S. Some much for fair journalism. If you want to be an arrogant a-hole say they are gonna win 5 or 6 games. Saying 3 wins just makes you look clueless.
RaiderMike
The only reason SI predicted 3 wins to Atlanta's 2 is so we don't get the #1 pick in the draft. From what I've read, Matt Ryan looks pretty good. Add Michael Turner, and maybe they win 3-5 games. Or not.
Weclome back RT. Good to see you fighting the good fight again.
FF players will be happy to to know that I drafted Fargas, Miller and Walker in my league. Somebody took both McFadden and Russell before I could. Next year, I will draft an all-Raiders team (errr, if SI thinks they're ready).
GO RAIDERS!
anon keeps bringing up that "russell will be running for his life back there."
i disagree, russell will be handing the ball off more times than he is passing. when you look at it, the offensive line is built for run-blocking, and we will do that well. we will only pass the ball when needed.
defensively, our primary philosophy should be to stuff the run. we have to stack 8, and play a read-n-react defense; using blitz packages on passing plays. but the key is putting ourselves in the position to stuff the run before the snap.
NYraider,
I've got Russell, Walker, Morrison, Raiders D, Seabass & M.Bush. I'm currently trying to get Miller and McFadden but some haters took them early to piss me off.
The only thing you gotta' watch out for is the bye week. :(
Psycho
There is one way that Ano could be right, but he hasn't said that's the basis for his conclusions.
Watching the D play this preseason, with the additions of Hall and Gibril, and the improved play along the the d-line, and the fact that Howard and Morrison have worked on, and improved, their run stopping techniques, the defense will play well enough to keep the offense in games. As long as we're in the game, we have the game breakers on offense to give us the win.
Worse case to me is 5 wins. But the weakest part of our team is still depth. Season ending injuries to a couple more of our best players (say Russell and Miller) could drop us into the Ano/SI zone.
But to expect those injuries is to hope for those injuries, revealing SI and Ano as nothing but haters.
Again, from my perspective, it's just revealing that SI predicts the Dolphins to win six games this year and the Lions to win seven this year (which certainly sound like best case scenarios to me) while predicting the Raiders to win just three games in 2008, which everyone here (including Anonymous) agrees is the very worst case scenario.
In other words, when it comes to the Raiders, SI abandons logic for wishful thinking.
Rational predictions, by definition, balance the best and worst case scenarios to project a reasonable outcome. SI's prediction for the Raiders, therefore, is not rational.
I was in Food-4-Less and I noticed all their Hatorade was gone. There is usually a supply shortage this time of year. It must be up to $50/gallon!
Psycho
wlecome back RT!!!! we've missed your unique perspective.
hey....this just in.... Lane Kiffin is wearing raider gear again!!! this must mean that it is a FACT that he and Al have put thier differences aside.
bet we don't see that story anytime soon. but god forbid he wakes up one morning for practice and all his Raider shit is dirty. WHOOOOOOA NELLIE!!!! what an oppertunity for a breakin story that would be!!!
HATERAID!!....GETCHER HATER AID HERE!!! ICE COLD HATERAID HERE!!!
frkyraider
I guess that I have a differing view on that the term "hating" means. To me, "hating" would be predicting the Raiders to be 3-13 if they were coming off of a 12-4 season. But when you have not won more than 5 games since the season you went to the Super Bowl, I think a 3 win prediction is just being rational. Like I said last night in my post, a rookie QB, a bad offensive line, a bad defensive line with Tommy Kelly coming off knee surgery and a pathetic WR corps, then 3-13 is definitely not out of the realm of possibility. If the Raiders suffer any major injuries, 3-13 could become a reality because the depth is razor thin on both sides of the ball.
Lets see... we should have a much improved defense with the addition of a second lock down CB and two safeties instead of one. The running game should be better because both Bush and McFadden are better than Jordan. The QB situation should be better simply because it is set... the same guy has been taking all the number one snaps since day one. We didn't lose any valuable players... and there is someone here trying to tell us we will be one win WORSE than last year?
Hey dude... put some money on it. Do you have Paypal and a real identity?
Gary
Don't forget the schedule is the easiest we have faced in about 6 or 7 years.
RaiderMike
Other reasons we will be better:
-The o-line has had the same coach for two seasons in a row for the first time in 5 years... and is in its second year in the ZBS.
-As everyone else has mentioned, the schedule looks like one of the easiest in the NFL.
-It looks like SOB has grown some balls and will actually blitz this year.
-Our rookie coach is no longer a rookie, thus will make less rookie mistakes.
Cman dude... my name is Gary DeWaay. Got some money to put on that 3 win season prediction?
Step up or step away.
Anon, I just think we're looking at it from two different angles.
Very little is out of the realm of possibility in the NFL. That's not the point. It's within the realm of possibility that the Patriots will go 8-8 and the Ravens will go 12-4 (stranger things have happened). But to predict such things would be irrational.
SI predicts the Dolphins to win 6 games this year with Ricky Williams as their lead runner and Chad Pennington as their QB, and coming off a 1-15 season and after losing Jason Taylor. The Raiders destroyed the Dolphins at home last year. I would submit to you that another 1-15 season is certainly not out of the realm of possibility for the Dolphins, yet SI spots them 5 wins in the other direction.
SI's bias against the Raiders has been well documented here at Raider Take. It's no coincidence that they view the Raiders from a "worst case scenario" perspective while not applying the same standard to the rest of the NFL in their "predictions."
Let's look at it this way. Last year the Raiders had one of the acknowledged most difficult schedules in the NFL. While playing musical QBs, and with the o-line learning yet another new system, and a new coach in every offensive position, the Raiders put together 4 wins.
Different this years is that the Raiders have the acknowledged easiest schedule in the NFL. We have a set QB with one of the best arms in the league. He also spent the entire off season working on Kiffin's offensive system - a far cry from Culpepper coming in late to camp. We have improved our RBs on the No. 6 running unit in the NFL. Our offensive line has had a year in Cable's system which saved Gallery's career. Grove is no longer in pain and has won the starting center job.
At WR we may be no better, but we're no worse.
We have improved our defensive backfields to one of the best in the country. We now have a SS safety who can not only play the run but LOVES to play the run. Howard and Morrison have worked hard to improve their run stopping skills. Kelly is moving to his natural position and is shining in camp and preseason games. We are improved (although only slightly) at DE. Caveman is now blitzing just for jollies, and having a good time doing it.
And then the big question is depth.
But our depth, in spite of being shallow, is the same depth we had last year. So let's do the math.
Easiest schedule instead of the hardest schedule + improved starting units + more experienced starting units + better, more stable quarterbacking + the wild card of potentially having one, if not two of the most electrifying runners in the NFL + plus the same depth as last year.
SI and Ano do that math and say - "the Raiders will lose at least one more game than last year."
BUZZZZZZZZ!
Oh, I'm sorry, that's not correct! But thanks for playing "How Big Of a MORON Can YOU be?"
RT, why don't you tell them about the consolation prizes they've won!
ROTFLOL
Sic -em, Gary. That Ano dude is pretty damned lame.
---Jeff
I think SI is just basing their predictions on what they have seen from the Raiders lately. If you all remember the "improvements" that Oakland made prior to the 2005 season. Randy Moss and Lamont Jordan were added and everyone thought that the Raiders offense would be unstoppable, including myself. What was the result? A 4-12 season. The Raiders have forgotten how to win over the last 5 years and so far on the field they have shown nothing to make some people think otherwise. Until the team shows it knows how to win, expect more of these types of predictions. I would not call it hating, I would call it making an educated guess based on the evidence you have presented before you.
By the way Gary, I am not predicting the Raiders to finish 3-13. I am just stating that to me, it is not a surprise that SI has picked the Raiders to finish 3-13, based on what we have seen from the team over the last 5 seasons, and the major major question marks they have heading into 2008. I said in one of my posts on here last night that I have the Raiders pegged at about the 5-11 mark and if they get a few lucky bounces then maybe 6-10 or 7-9. But if I had to pick one record and stick with it, then I would have to say 5-11 for the reasons I stated last night. If a rash of injuries occur, then you may very well be looking down the barrel of a 3-13 season.
I have to commend you, Anon, for stating your case, and for being willing to take arrows from the gang. You're the type of thick-skinned guy we want around here, although you need a good handle.
Still, I think you're flat wrong on this. Last year, six teams won four or less games. This year, according to SI, only two teams will win four or less games, the Falcons and the Raiders. Funny how so many teams just got better, while the Raiders just got worse.
It's not an objective prediction, but rather selective wishful thinking, that pegs the Raiders at 3-13 while fawning over the Dolphins to improve their win record by 500%.
If a rash of injuries occur to the Pats or Chargers they can be looking at 3-13. So what's your point?
RaiderMike
Anon:
2 parts of your "argument" are completely irrelevant.
Point 1:
What the Raiders have done the last 5 years impacts what the team will do in 2008.
I would argue that last year's record/performance is relevant to the discussion because there is a carry over in personnel. How on green's earth does it matter what the team did in 2006 under Shell, a different coaching staff, and different personnel etc.?
Point 2:
"If such and such player gets hurt the Raiders are looking down the barrel of a 3 win season"
Newsflash: If ANY team in the NFL has the misfortune of losing key players ... ALL bets are off on any August "predictions".
It is a hollow argument because in essence you are making a prediction of an injury that hasn't happened to effect your prediction of wins.
Based on a just a few logical parameters, it is inconceivable for the Raiders to win only 3 games:
#1 Better overall talent
#2 Additional playmakers (Hall, Wilson, Walker, Bush, McFadden, Russell)
#3 A MUCH easier schedule
#4 Continuity; system & coaching
At the end of the day, predictions are fun to make but are totally meaningless.
BTW, if you adopt a handle, most of us would treat you with more respect.
How about "Doom Raider?"
Man.....Our backups suck!
Kiffin wasn't kidding.
Psycho
The Raiders look to be one of the most improved teams in the Freekin NFL....But we had a lot of room to improve....The basic truth is that as we improve the rest of the AFCW got weaker....That counts as "Addition threw Subtraction" and should result in a better record....
"SHOULD"....
"TD"..."TD"...Raiders Score....1:51 4th Qr....
PantyRaider...Hot-n-Wet in Cambodia!!!
raiderrealist, lmfao on the "doom raider" name. i love it. maybe "doom-n-gloom raider"
ok so not too much comes out of last nights game, except.....unfortunitly i saw something that has me at the end of my rope for henderson. now i can put up with a guy thats a little slow to learn his position and all, but what i will not tolarate is non-effort. just caught it out of the corner of my eye on a turnover of ours, a seahawk guy grabs the ball and starts running down the sidelines and i see about 5 maybe ten max yards behind him i see henderson loafin his big arse after the ball. well in football little fast guys are forced to stop, cut back and are plowed over by big slow guys that hustle. happens all the time, but never without hustle. you can be big and slow, i don't care, but give little effort and i care alot. 3rd round bust or not, project or not, depth we need or not, we must draw the line on non-effort!!!!! to me this just say "i don't really want to play". now i'm not usually one to say this about someone but.....cut him, there will be better players who WANT to play on the waiver wire.
frkyraider
Just saw the cut list. Not one of them surprised me.
So I guess Watkins, Shields and Schilins made the team at WR.
I can't believe we couldn't find a better OT than Henderson. As of today he has no business being on an NFL roster.
Psycho
I wish they could have kept Rankin.
Sam Williams, Hiram Eugene and Mario Henderson made the team!!! why????? That lawton kid actually looked good, as the second fb ,but he got cut. Go figure!
Psycho,
I'd take Jessica Alba over me also.
Willie Anderson was released by the Stripped Kittens. 10 year vet with two trips to the Pro Bowl. Gotta be better than Henderson.
H
Here's the practice squad:
CB Darrrick Brown
DE Greyson Gunheim
WR Jonathan Holland
DT Mauricio Lopez
P Glenn Pakulak
RB Louis Rankin
FB Marcel Reece
TE Darrell Strong
OL Brandon Torrey
H-
Anderson would provide the much needed depth we lack on this team. Kiffin was quoted saying," The problem with (Cable's) system is, it's so hard to get guys from somewhere else who are in(another) system," "One of the bad things is, if guys haven't been trained in this system, it's hard, especially if they're bigger guys, to come in and be real functional in this system."
While that could be argued, I think having him on the team than not would suffice our OL needs down the season.
We just signed Ashley Lelie from the Whiners. Any thoughts?
Mr. Duva
I never thought I'd see the day when Ashley Lelie and Javon Walker were both on our team. It's like we can't get off the head-case hamster wheel when it comes to receiver. Out with Moss and Porter, only to be reliant on Lelie and Walker. Well, let's hope this pair can get sufficiently geeked up against their mutual nemesis Shanarat on Monday. This game will tell us what they're made of. I hope I can learn to like them more than I do right now, but they'll have to earn it.
realist, rankin is on the practice squad but he won't be for long. that's because that porcelain doll fagass'll prol break a hangnail or something to land him on IR.
:o)
Take, I second that opinion. However things just got much worse for us. Hot off the presses:
We are bringing in Chad Jackson in for a visit on Tuesday according to PFT.com. And Walker supposedly is out with a hamstring injury for week 1.
Jackson is another DIVA receiver that the pasties couldn't convert into a stand up guy. He should fit right into AL's "Raider Mystic" as he would like to say.
Man, why can’t we bring in decent players into our Nation? I am tired of AL pissing away money on players whose egos are bigger than Davis’ own ego. This is why we can never be a creditable football organization in the NFL.
Al will bury this team right into the dirt, with himself along with it sooner than later. Can Kiffin gel these bunch of guys into a decent team this season? I have no clue. Kiffin is already working this team alone as it is; does he have want it takes to prove Davis wrong? I am afraid that Kiffin will be used on the chopping block once again when the team does not succeed because Davis fails to bring in quality players.
Let the James Lofton Era Begin 2009……..
the key is, are davis and kiffin on the same page at this point ?
listening to kiffin talk all during pre season, he is fully aware there is much more of the hill to climb.
but...
what is al thinking ??????
is he thinking, hey, we got ourselves a real shot at the playoff's here.
if he is, than kiffin cannot survive, because the raiders just have to many holes in key positions to make the playoff's.
no left tackle, no run stuffer, and noooooooooooo wide receivers weapons, for poor jruss.
just hand it off baby !!!!!
the raiders still need alot, but they need alot less than 2 years ago.
patience is the key. next year the raiders will be REALLY good, if they do not foolishly shoot for the moon this season.
but if al thinks the raiders are better than they are, it will be tear it down again, and start all over again.
sounds retarded ? well, raiderland is a soap opera as we know.
fizzler take, the fizzlers won't win 3 games! Sports Illustrated is just being kind to appease the neanderthal typical fizzler fanatic. The choketown fizzlers will win 0 games and lose 16, good luck "james loftongue" big al (MR.) davis will make you head coach after loss # 5, Mr. Kiffin will be vindicated, just choke babies, defund the "notion"....
According to Jerry Mac latest blog entry, Walker is fine:
"On the practice field, a No. 84 was observed running routes at full speed and making hard cuts under the watchful eye of coach Lane Kiffin.
After practice, Walker was chatty and in good spirits in front of his locker, discussing his number change and looking forward to playing the opener against his former team, even as he downplayed the revenge factor.
If he had sustained a hamstring injury serious enough to put him at risk for the opener, chances are he would have been in treatment or at least had his leg wrapped. Instead, he was in the locker room, no sign of a limp or discomfort.
From what I’ve been able to discern, Walker had enough of a twinge in his hamstring to be checked out, but that it’s not considered to be serious in terms of missing the opener."
My take on the signing of Lelie and the tryout of Jackson:
Our current WR corps basically has 2 guys with experience (Walker, Curry). Because of our paper thin depth chart, we are attempting to upgrade our roster with more experienced WRs. Lelie, although very inconsistent in terms of production, adds a deep threat. He has averaged over 17 yards per reception in his career.
Jackson is a 2nd rounder who had a prolific career at UF and played on Patsie teams that were very deep at WR.
Going into the 08 season, which 5 WRs would you feel better about:
Group 1:
Walker
Curry
Higgins
Watkins
Schillens
or
Group 2:
Walker
Curry
Lelie
Jackson
Higgins
Signing Lelie & possibly Jackson to 1 year, incentive laden contracts wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Perhaps 1 of the 2 would earn the right to come back in 09. Maybe both lay an egg. Either way, we are going to be looking for an infusion of talent at this position, regardless.
calico,
have to take the group with chaz schillens.
he showed real promise during pre season. great hands, and no fear of going to the middle to make a catch.
good size/speed combo as well.
wouldn't want to lose him at this stage.
Raider00,
That's why it will be either Lelie or Jackson, but not both. Schillens has too much potential to cut him loose at this point.
I have a feeling that if Branch was out of his cast and catching ok Higgins would be the odd man out.
H
Ok, I get Google News Alerts for the Raiders. But, some are just silly. One just showed up that was scounting the 2009 draft.
I just deleted it. I couldn't bring myself to open such tripe.
H
WR Theory:
We do not have to cut a WR to add a WR. We still have Sam Williams on the roster, and he should be cut after a non-stellar performance. He was worse than Hartwell! I think he gets the axe to make room for Lelie.
After our game Monday night against the Doncos, we bring in Koren Robinson. Robinson will audtion for the Kick-off Return and #3 or 4 receiver. We then cut Higgins. Jackson, I believe is coming in to see not only for WR, but how he handles kick-offs. I don't think we offer him a deal.
William Joseph, Fred Wakefield, Trevor Scott, or Todd Watkins might get cut for Luke Lawton; either that or Tyvon Branch will be put on IR. I'd hate to see Wakefield and Watkins get cut.
Scott, I'm 50-50 about.
I think we go after Koren Robinson after Week 1, not Joe Horn. If we do that, I expect Higgins to be gonzo; with Branch doing back up. The only way I don't see that happening is if Branch is put on IR.
I should say, the only way I don't see Higgins getting cut, is if Branch is put on IR
>>>>
If a rash of injuries occur, then you may very well be looking down the barrel of a 3-13 season.
>>>>
And if we have 7 players make the pro-bowl, we will be looking at the playoffs.
I can't think of anything more meaningless to say about NFL football. Oh wait... if we score more points than the other team every week we will win a lot of games!!!
Jeesh.
Branch isn't going anywhere. He'll be our return man by week three. We can cut Sam Williams because we have extra LBs on the team right now.
Lelie and Jackson brought in in this situation is vintage Al Davis. Both were potential superstars who fell off the charts because of a combination of attitude and the inability to see eye to eye with their coaches. Both still have the talent, but not the motivation. Davis tests that motivation by offering minimum veteran contracts with the opportunity to earn incentive money and a permanent position on the team.
What it would come down to for both Lelie and Jackson is whether they believe that Raiders will earn them some attention if they succeed. Kiffin needs to get them up to speed as quickly as possible, and stress to them that Russell has learned not to throw the ball to receivers who have left their patterns.
Pay no attention to the pre season here. What I have learned about Kiffin is that he cares less about winning preseason games than any Raider coach in our history. Pre season games are scrimmages to Kiffin, and nothing more.
The only pre season game that actually resembled a game the Raiders might play is the 49er game, and possibly the first half of the Titans game.
Consider that in the Titans game Kiffin announced that the focus was going to be on stopping the run and running a conservative offense to avoid mistakes (Kiffin wanted to see how the run defense was showing up, and what a concentrated running game would look like). In the game against the Cards, Kiffin said that we were going to abandon the run and throw (we wanted to check how our o-line was picking up blitzes, and how JaMarcus was reacting to them). Against Seattle, all of the regulars took the day off because all Kiffin wanted to know was who was absolutely going to be gone, and decide where we needed to find replacements.
As for Kiffin's relationship with Davis, to me, so far, this looks like the perfect Al Davis/Head Coach relationship. And no matter how the press tries to spin it, that's what I've seen.
Here's a quote I saw about Russell:
"There are no worries about his arm strength but nagging doubts remain over both his work ethic and ability to make plays outside the pocket."
This clown has evidently not heard the rave reviews from Kiffin about his work ethic. And, Kiffin is not known for pulling punches. He also did not see that TD pass to Miller while rolling to his left and throwing across his body.
Do these people actually get paid for this???????????????
Also, and I'm paraphrasing here, Kiffin has said about his relationship with Davis, if you try to please sombody and lose you get fired anyway. If I win, I'll keep my job.
H
H, the one thing we have to keep in mind is that "objective reporting" no longer exists. It has gone extinct. You can apply this to sports, politics, global warming, and war reporting.
When it comes to reporting on these subjects, the writer of the article will tend to report their opinion or observation. It may be intelligent, but in most cases is absolutely absurd with no objective other than to piss people off.
Gary, don't forget the "If we make all the right plays on offense and defense, we will come out with the higher score and a win."
The money quote from Lane Kiffin.
I showed up in these parts (Raider Take) about the time that Art Shell did. I thought Shell would bring some of the swagger back, but he didn't. As head coaches, I didn't like Mike White, Joe Bugel, or Norv Turner. None of these coaches was a coach in the usual Davis mold or Raider tradition.
Gruden I liked. I didn't like Callahan, but for a whole different set of reasons.
I like Lane Kiffin, so don't let the press fool you. So does Al Davis, and I'll leave it to Lane Kiffin to tell you why.
"If we win here, I'm going to keep my job, regardless whether you try to please people to do that. If you try to please somebody and lose, you're going to get fired here."
White, Bugel and Turner all knew what Davis liked, and each, in turn, abandoned their own knowledge and judgement to show they were "Al's guys."
Davis has almost 60 years in this business, but that doesn't make him believe that he knows everything and only he can crank out a winner. When Davis hires a coach, he expects that coach to add to the mix, shake things up a bit, and make things better. Well, no - not just better. To bring about excellence.
By doing battle with Davis after his first season, Kiffin didn't just survive - he gave himself some job security.
Now, there is no question that Kiffin will be gone if he can't bring about a winner. But Davis doesn't hire HCs to follow him around with their lips firmly attached to his wrinkly behind. He hires them to raise the quality of the team if the team is at a low point, and to maintain the quality of the team if it is winning.
I think old news but...
Pat Kirwin on Sirius on Al and Lane
A caller calls up and says the Raiders are a mess and doesn't understand why if Al can spend all this money on players, why is he holding out on firing Kiffin, a coach he hates, over a million or two.
Kirwin says,
Its way over blown, do they have a father son relationship? No,but it is a lot better than just tolerating each other. Both want to win badly and don't want anyone to get in their way. Al admires his pit bull mentality and they do work close with each other on everything and are both trying to improve their relationship. Also, Kiffin has a great relationship with that WR coach who apparently is taking his job, and that Kiffin didn't want to fire Rob Ryan but that Ryan had a lot of job offers but Al wouldn't let him out of his contract
Then Tim Ryan asks the important question
Has the media blown this way out of proportion?
Kirwin's answer is
Yes, but that doesn't mean Al won't fire him if he has a losing season, but then again why should he keep him if they have a losing season.
Exactly what I've been sayin'...
"why should they keep him if he has a losing season" ?
well, what's a losing season ?
is 7-9 a losing season ?
it may be a losing record, but if you consider the raiders have no left tackle, not much of a right tackle. no run stuffer, are ultra thin at wr, and are starting a rookie qb, and rb, 7 wins aint to shabby.
we have to remember where this team was when kiffin arrived.
remember aaron brooks, and quitter moss, and prima dona porter, and shell shocked shell, and pancakes on the menu ?
kiffin stepped in to coach a barely breathing franchise.
kiffin, a rookie himself, coached one year, and at least, made the raiders seem proffesional during most games.
i'm as big a fan as anyone, but if the raiders win 10 games this year, i'll eat al davis' sunglasses during halftime of their first playoff game.
forget the playoff's. 7 wins this year. keep kiffin. fill in the missing pieces, and next year we will return to power.
repeat this seasons montra with me please:
PATIENCE = STABILITY, but, PLAYOFF'S = STUPIDITY.
Seven wins?
I think with Al it all has to do with how we win seven wins. If we struggle against the AFCW, and get most of our wins out of conference, Kiffin might still be gone. However, if we sweep like KC and Den and struggle elsewhere to get to 7, he might get another year.
Eight wins is what Kiffin needs regardless, IMO.
I'd be disappointed with less than that.
our team is not built to win 8. sorry, that is just the way it is. we still haven't proven we can stuff the run with the same old can't hack it defensive tackles. we are doing the same thing we've done on that aspect the last 3 season, a 3 man shift, except sapp isn't on the team, and the shift is kelly, warren, and sands. my question is are we going to stack 8 in the box, and let our corners play man? if we do that then we can win 8.
which leads us to the next step. our offense. everyone knows we are going to run the ball, so they are going to stack 8, and if we pass, blitz the bejesus out of us. with two tackles who are injury prone, how long will it be before we have 2nd and 3rd string tackles in there? if that happens, how does that change our game plan.
7 wins is best case scenario for me. i expect 6 wins, 4 games is the worst case scenario. 8+ wins is really stretching the imagination. i despise saying it, i really do. i know gary won't agree with it, and i'll get all kinds of hell from most on this site.
so before you hammer me, realize that i also say it in hopes that the raiders prove me wrong this year. i'm tired of the hype of "we have the talent to win." well, win! prove it! talent is not enough to win, it is how you use the talent. we have the talent to stack 8, blitz on the pass, and let our corners make the plays. so why not do it?
what we lack is balance on the offense to pass the ball effectively when we need to; and believe me, we will need to. that is the biggest concern for me; and now i'm saying "just prove it, baby!"
Nate, no hell from me. I understand how you feel. But I'm not willing to put up a number until I see at least one regular season game. It seems to me that Kiffin has done his absolute best to low profile this team, and I think it has more in the tank than he lets on.
Oh, I fully expect that they will struggle at time this season. The rookies will have to adjust on the fly as teams throw new things at them.
But it looks to me like the Raider defense will hold up this year and keep things close. It's not just the additional personnel, it's also a new strategy that involves new blitzing schemes designed to prepare JaMarcus in camp. If games stay close, that gives our newly acquired gamebreakers a chance.
Right now I'm thinking that 7 wins is the worst case scenario. I think we'll come up with nine to ten if can avoid injuries. Don't forget, we don't even play a team with a winning record until like the 12th game.
acutally, we play the chargers on week 4.
Nate.. why do you say you don't think we can stop the run when nobody ran on our starters much in the practice games?
What do you know that we don't?
If you are guessing... just say so.
If so... I have to wonder about the mentality of a "fan" that is guessing that the team he is "rooting" for will suck.
You are right about one thing, I will give you shit for it. Every single time, as a matter of fact.
>>>>
But I'm not willing to put up a number until I see at least one regular season game.
>>>>
All a person can do now is look at the practice games (obvious improvement) and look at what happened last year (losing 6 games by less than a TD) and look at the schedule (much easier this year) and look at the new players vs the players we lost (Gibril, Hall, McF, Bush vs Sapp, and Porter).
Add to this Kiffin and the rest of the coaches having another year to work the kinks out... golly gee whiz... I don't see at all how we can win 4 more games!!
This isn't rocket science really. Anyone that follows the team faithfully should look at 8 wins as very doable. 8 wins is STILL not that good really. JFC.
And then there are Raider fans. lol
Oh, and I wasn't talking about you Blanda... you, I, and H are pretty much the only "glass half full" posters here.
It's why a good start in week one will make being a Raider fan much more enjoyable again... we won't have to start reading "the sky is falling" posts all over the Raider Nation again.
I want a blow out against the Donks!!!
Here's why we are going 8-8 folks:
I see only six probable losses:
Den at home: W
KC away: W
Buf away: W
SD home: L
NO away: L
Jets home: W
Bal away: L
Atl home: W
Car home: W
Mia Away: W
Den away: W
KC home: W
SD away: L
NE home: L
Hou home: W
TB away: L
I look at KC and Den as two of the worst teams in the league. 4 tough
wins (because of the history) but "easy" wins none the less. Neither
team stacks up well against us because they were 30th and 28th against
the run (as we saw last year). KC lost their best defensive player...
and Den lost Lynch. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these 4 games as
blowouts in our favor.
Buf away might be a loss because it's an east coast game... that's seven losses. And I will toss in one other loss at random. Where does everyone else see the 9th and 10th losses?
PS: This is the year we upset SD!
Gary,
7 wins or 8 wins is really splitting hairs.
remember, the refs usually job us out of a game or two, so you have to factor that in.
but the reason i am low balling is simple.
jruss has great talent, but will he have time to throw, and when he does, just who will he throw it to ?
and yeah, i'm with raidernate when he says, don't just say we can stop the run, stop it when it counts. show us something for a change. just don't stop it in quarters 1 and 2. how about 3 and 4 as well.
maybe i've knocked over my glass and half my raiderjuice spilled out, but i don't want to lose kiffin because the team is only half built.
In my mind, Kif has what he needs to keep his job. He may not have what he needs to go to the playoffs. As miserable as this team had become, it takes a while to develop a playoff caliber team. Oh, sure, you can do what some teams do - surprise everyone for a season and then go back to losing - but as Raider fans we demand long term success.
But Kiffin has shown a love for the thinking man's game. By that I mean throwing your opponents a little mental misdirection.
Last preseason I said that Nnamdi was on his way to being a shut down corner because of the way he tested the limits of what he could get away with during the pre-season games.
This year it's Kiffin. He announces to the other team that we are going to come out and throw the ball. And then that's the game plan he orders up during the week. Then he says, "see how bad we are at stopping the pass rush?"
Kiffin has low profiled this team so much that KC might even take us for granted this year. Seems to me that might be just a little bit of an advantage.
IMO, for this team to be successful, they will have to play every game like it's their last. If they do, I believe they are ready (with personnel and coaching) to split games with SD and possibly sweep KC or Den, or both.
There is nothing more important than beating the teams in your division. That's where our successes must continue to evolve.
If we start winning games and build confidence, we could be a dangerous opponent for teams like the Pats by mid-season.
Regardless, Kiffin should not be gaged by wins and losses, but rather by the development of this very young team into a contender. Forget 8 wins. That’s BS. Even Kiffin refuses to set winning goals.
If Kiff's job hinges solely on wins, then somebody's ego is driving that thought process.
Realistically, this is not our season to “win,” but we should continue to see marked development. Hopefully, the wins will be a by-product of that development.
NYRaider, somehow I don't think that Al Davis is looking for "marked development" this season. He wants to see wins, and he will want to see at least 8 of them or Kiffin is gone.
6 wins? 7 wins? 8 wins? 9 wins? 10 wins? WHO KNOWS?
The difference between 6 wins and 10 will be largely decided by a few critical factors:
(1) Run D
(2) Pass offense
(3) Russell's development
Point 1:
Stopping the run on D is a VERY legit concern.
In essence, we need to count on above average years of performance from Warren, Sands, and Kelly.
Can each rise to the ocassion?
Warren has been hot or cold displaying a knack for playing really well for a stretch of the game and then
completely disappearing from action.
Sands, according to Kiffin, is not in the top of physical condition required to play 4 full quarters.
Kelly is coming off major surgery, working on his conditioning, and has been moved back inside.
We have no one else in the interior to back up this 3 man rotation unless you count Richardson in a pinch.
I want our run D to be much improved but after 5 consecutive years of piss poor run D, I'm at the point where it is "prove it". Prove you can stop a critical drive in the 4th quarter. Prove you can minimize the 20+ yard scampers that break our backs.
Prove that you can play run D on a consistent basis to FORCE the other team to pass.
Point 2:
The passing attack is clearly a work in progress. We have a 1st year starter with subpar protection throwing to a less than stellar WR corps.
Out of our current 6 WRs, the only one I feel I can count on is Curry. Walker is a major wild card for a litany of reasons. Lelie has been a ghost the past 3 seasons. Higgins can't be trusted to run the right pattern. Watkins and Schiellens are rookies... enough said.
Once again, we need a solid 3 of the 6 WRs to step up.
Point 3:
I feel like Russell is on the right track to become a premier QB. My concern is that he is operating with 2 difficult hurdles to clear to be effective in the passing game. Pass protection and a reliable, dynamic WR group. As the franchise QB, he has a big load on his shoulders to make the best of a difficult situation. I love his level head, poise, and composure when things get difficult.
Overall, I believe our D will be much improved with the additions and reconfiguration. I love our rushing offense. It is my view that we will need to play excellent D (and make big, game chaning plays on D) and establish our run offense as a force. I also think that Kiffin will need to manage the game and creatively use a diversified, "safe" passing offense using backs and TE.
I know we play 16 games but in my lifetime, no 1st game has ever seemed so critical to shape and influence the rest of the season. Raiders vs. Donkeys is HUGE.
>>>>
I know we play 16 games but in my lifetime, no 1st game has ever seemed so critical to shape and influence the rest of the season. Raiders vs. Donkeys is HUGE.
>>>
I agree.
If we come out a lay a whooping on Den, we can get some of our swagger back, things will start loosening up in the locker room... Kiffin will start gaining respect... everything.
A close win will be nice. A lose will be horrible.. I honestly think Den has nothing.
I'm simply not as worried about our run defense as everyone else because of GIBRIL! Our run defense really wasn't that bad last year except for all the agonizing long runs. Huff is not a strong safety and Stuey was always in the wrong time zone and forgot how to tackle. Most of those long runs would have been medium runs with actual safety play... a difference of what... 50 yards a game? Thats a lot of yards in the game of inches. We lost six games by a TD or less. SIX GAMES.
This team isn't that far off.
For as bad as Cutler played against us last year, he looked sharp in pre-season this year (it pains me to say that). Kiffin even stated as much.
IMO, Cutler is the Donkeys only hope for success this year. They've lost players along their lines, at skill positions and at kicker (Jason Elam), and will be without the services of their #1 receiver in the opener.
Rookie OT Ryan Clady will start for Denver. Inasmuch as Clady could someday be a star, it is just as likely that he will get schooled by Burgess in his first NFL game.
Gary said, "Nate.. why do you say you don't think we can stop the run when nobody ran on our starters much in the practice games?"
I say we can't stop the run based on the same people we have in place to stop the run up front minus Sapp, plus let's look at these "Practice Games" (Preseason) you mentioned.
49ers-Clayton and Foster ran for a collective 40 yards on 11 carries, against our starters. Frank Gore did not play. The whole game they rushed for 70 yards on 19 carries.
Titans-Johnson and White ran 16 times for 85 yards against our starters. The whole game the team rushed for 140 on 26 carries.
Cardinals-Arrington and Hightower carried the ball 12 times and rushed for 123 yards against our starters. The team collectively rushed for 215 yards on 39 carries.
Seahawks-none of our starters played so I won't count their stats.
So 3 games our starters played in the preseason, here is what other teams did against them:
39 carries, 248 yards, and averaged a 6.36 yards per carry.
I stand by my statement that we haven't proven that we can stop the run. We can estimate what we observe, this is what we've seen our starters do. I go back to my overall statement, I said this is my position from what I've observed, if they can do otherwise (like they are claiming they can), JUST PROVE IT, BABY!
So now I ask you this, why do you keep living in a delusional world that nobody ran on our starters this preseason?
ARE YOU READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL!?!?!?!
Psycho
Gary,
Glass half full? Hell, I'm at 71.3%.
Look, we have a 50-50 chance of opening 3-0 or 2-1. Think what that would do for the psyche of this team.
We also have a secret weapon on this team. And Kiffin need look no further than the Alabama-Clemson game last Saturday to see how to use him.
Our secret weapon? Zack Miller.
Last year Alabama had a guy named Nick Walker. 6' 5" around 250 or so. I kept screaming at the TV for someone, anyone to throw the ball to him. After the season, the OC took a lesser job at Texas.
Last Saturday, Nick Walker's number was called 8 times for 7 receptions. Six in the first half. His longest was only 21 yards.
Clemson started the game with eight in the box. After about the third first down they backed off and Alabama started running three (sound familiar) backs right at the Clemson defense. As soon as they put 8 in the box again, back to Walker.
Mid way through the second quarter, Clemson was trying to stop the run and cover Walker. Then they went to the big WR's.
They totally controlled the clock and the ball.
Kiffin goes to Miller early and often it will loosen up the run. Loosen up the run, you slow down the rush with play action.
Do that through the first three weeks and we are talking about a potential Pro Bowl tight end in his second year.
Control the clock and score and the other team has to pass more.
That's the Raider teams I remember. Our vaunted vertical game was always set up by running the ball and involving the tight end, not as a safety valve, but as a primary receiver. Your safety valve guys don't catch as many passes as Dave and Todd did.
A rested defense also plays and reacts better.
Just my somewhat humble opinion.
Psycho,
HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
H
Nate, those are some alarming stats. I'm concerned that the run D problem is not solved. Add to that, Kelly is coming off injury, Sands is out of shape, Warren is streaky, and we have little depth behind these guys because we had to add WRs to the roster due to another whole set of problems (insert deep breath).
Serenity now. Serenity now.
I remain optimistic! Go Raiders!
Question: Can Warren dial it up a notch against his former team like he did last year?
First offensive play of the game? I expect Denver to stack the box with eight, and bring the zone blitz.
Play action fake to Fargas up the middle - look deep for Walker down the left side-line - if it's not there, 15 yards over the middle to Miller.
Second play of the game. Bush and McFadden both line up in the back field.
McFadden goes in motion to the right. Russell takes the snap and pitches to Bush running right. McFadden chip blocks the DE then floats five yards down field. Bush throws a touch pass to McFadden who jukes the LB out of his jockstrap. With down field blocking from Miller and Curry, McFadden goes 60 yards for a TD.
For a short period Bush leads the team in TD passes and McFadden in TD receptions.
It could happen. And, the Parakeets could go undefeated too. But, just in case remember you heard it here first.
H
1st play:
QB Sneak with both OT's whiffing on the DE's and getting to the second level. Grove & Carlisle split the DT's while Russell TRUCKS the MLB between them and knocks the facemask right off his helmet. He's unconcious and has severe rectal trauma from the shockwave that rounded his body and converged in the buttocks area.
Miller cleans up the WLB, Russell see's it and jukes left, just behind K.Harris, who takes out the pathetic loser who replaced Lynch at FS. Russell runs straight toward the RCB, who panicks and falls to the side out of fear.
Champ Bailey is the only man left and has the speed to close on Russell from the opposite side. Russell gives him the ultimate stiff-arm from hell, turning Bailey's body awkwardly, tearing both of his ACL's and ending his career.
Russell high-steps like Dieon and seamlessly transitions into a Riverdance in front of the Black Hole.
Psycho
Well hey Nate, Kudos to you for pulling stats up from practice games... I only watched one and 1/2 games, and I didn't notice anything so spectacularly horrible against the run by our starters. All is lost. Let's all pack it in. This is the second time Nate has written the season off before the first game. I am wrong... I happen to think that with Gibril and Huff we will turn a ton of those 20 to 40 yard gains into 10 to 15 yard gains.
My bad...
Rushing defense stats:
Oakland: 26th in the league vs run. All is lost.
However... the following teams suck worse than the Raiders and also should pack it in this season:
Balt: 23rd (their defense always sucks)
Chicago: 31st (ditto)
Indy: 30th (too bad they are going to suck so bad this year)
GB: 29th (I guess their defense is over rated also)
Chargers: 25th (hey wait... does this mean Nate thinks we can run on them this year???)
btw... those were the all important PRACTICE GAME stats.
btw... those were the all important PRACTICE GAME stats.
I will not...
Be denied...
#100 posts!!
Psycho
Saying our best chance is 7 wins is not writing the season off, especially since we haven't won 5 in the last 5 years. It's an improvement, and a major improvement. I'm not buying that we are an 8+ win team. I think we still have some weak areas we need to address before we start considering ourselves a wildcard team. So how is that writing off the season. Here's a novel idea, quit putting words in my mouth loser.
One day I was surfing web and suddenly I discovered website called www.home-businessreviews.com I learned how to start my own home business and i was able finally leave my work where i worked 1 year, now I'm earning 150$/day. I was able to earn such kind of money because I discovered some really great home business opportunity. At website called www.home-businessreviews.com
Anyway seems that site owner finally discovered winner home business program which helped him to begin his own internet home business opportunity, so he eventually decided to make website and tell about his own experience about making cash online. It seems that he lost thousands of dollars before he found winner home business program which actually work. But which one? take a look at site below!
[url=http://www.home-businessreviews.com]home business opportunity[/url]
http://markonzo.edu http://www.fiql.com/blogs/Nifedipine http://blog.tellurideskiresort.com/members/celexa-side-effects.aspx respsonse http://profiles.friendster.com/plavix#moreabout http://aviary.com/artists/Zyprexa http://www.netknowledgenow.com/members/zolpidem-tartrate.aspx
Maybe memebers know what are good benefits of purchasing affiliate websites? today I'm considering to obtain one? Can some people suggest any nice website to read some more reviews or thoughts which site can give me large income? I found this site
[url=http://www.home-businessreviews.com/Turnkey-Affiliate-Websites.html]affiliate websites[/url] - owner wrote that he had amazing great profit using these turnkey websites. He claims that he earns many thousands of dollars every month with these websites. sorry for offtopic.
This is site I need your opinion
http://www.home-businessreviews.com/Turnkey-Affiliate-Websites.html
Post a Comment
<< Home