One Postgame Un-Take
Unprepared. Uninspired. Unorganized. Undisciplined. That's my un-Take for this unsightly loss to the lowly Browns.The lack of composure wasn't limited to the players. On first and goal at the two-yard line with plenty of time to mount a comeback, our offensive coordinator went with an empty backfield (!), resulting in an incompletion. Then we passed the ball again. And again. And again.
Ummm...Michael Bush is averaging five yards per carry this season (including during this game). We were playing one of the worst run defenses in the NFL. Yet we pass the ball four straight times from the two-yard line?
Meanwhile, two players were ejected amid a hail of 13 penalty flags. I don't want to hear about how the zebras are out to get us, how the other team started it, blah, blah, blah. Get over it. Say the zebras are out to get us? Then accept it and adapt to it. Don't make it worse. I'm sick of the excuses. The zebras don't false start. The zebras don't drop balls. The zebras don't get sacked on crucial downs.
We have seen the enemy, and the enemy is us.
How can Bush not get a carry in this game after the 35-minute mark? Against the Browns' poor run defense? With Charlie Frye struggling?
How can the Browns' top running back run the ball four more times than ours? They saw Derek Anderson and planned their game accordingly. We saw Charlie Frye and hallucinated Daryle Lamonica.
If Bush is in the doghouse, then give him some dog food. But if he's going to play, then freakin' play the guy. He's averaging five yards per carry despite having had no consistency in his workload.
Against the Chiefs, Bush averaged 8.5 yards on 14 carries, and we rewarded him the next week with four carries (on which he gained 6.8 yards on average). His carries then went down to three, one and then none in the subsequent three games. Then he busts loose with 7.4 yards per carry on 18 rushes against the Broncos, only to be abandoned today after 35 minutes of play against one of the NFL's worst rush defenses.
I have nothing more to say right now. Thank you for listening. Out.
posted by Raider Take at 8:51 PM
143 Comments:
Beating a couple playoff teams in a season marred by blowout losses isn't really "turning the corner."
We don’t play up to the competition, but occasionally they play down to us. I guess the Browns weren’t having any of that. We were outplayed and out-coached.
Gradkowski showed us a flash of life on the other side, but that was only a mirage. One man can’t change (or overcome) an entire organization steeped in dysfunction.
SCAR
My personal default position on the Raiders is this...
From the day Lane Kiffin was fired, I said fire the GM.
I certainly don't mind that I am in the minority thinking that Lane was good for the Raiders. Lane wanted to win and in order to win in the ultra competitive nfl, the most competitive league in the world,he wanted control of the coaching staff, offense, defense, and special teams. He didnt get it.
I couldnt help but think about The Raiders wild card victory in Cleveland in 81. Those are some of my earliest memories of being a Raiders fan. What a magical way for a 8 year old boy to become a fan right? Straight to the top of the mountain...Thanks Al Davis.
Al Davis, will you step aside, or get some help so that other Raider fans can have thier magic ride to the top?
As for the loss to the Browns, it chaps my hide to see RR who with the Raiders kissed Al's ring every single day, thus leading to punchless, disgusting play by the defense, get the victory.
What I want to know is why this blog hasnt appropriately given Charlie Frye his due. I sure aint the heart and soul of this blog, but it was pretty obvious to me(aside from first half penalties killing our offensive drives) that this loss is to a considerable extent on Charlie Frye and his interceptions. I am not calling for Jamarcus(what a REDICULOUS proposition that would be), I do question the playcalling, but let's not be selective with our criticisms and let a good guy off the hook just because there are bigger problems. Charlie is a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback, not the answer to the quarterback position.
The roots of this loss are on Al Davis, the branch of this loss is on Cable, and the fruit of this loss is on Charlie Frye...
P.s. I was hoping Frye would get his homecoming victory like Gradkowski got his. Frye is a good enough guy in the locker room, and as previously suggested here, may make a great coach some day.
SCAR
If what Warren Sapp reported after his retirement is true than it's probably Al dialing up all these pass plays.We have an embarassment of riches in our backfield.
I believe we are at the mercy of Davis until he can't do it anymore.
Regarding Charlie Frye, I really hate to pin anything on him.
What kind of team asks Charlie Frye, starting only his third game in three years, on the road in freezing weather, to pass the ball 45 times while handing the ball to Michael Bush 10 times against one of the worst rush defenses in the NFL?
Who asks Charlie Frye to toss the ball four times from the two-yard line?
Yes, he threw some picks. He's an NFL castoff and a third stringer, so I'm not surprised. Nice guy, good character, but probably just lacks that split-second "something" that separates the wheat from the chaff.
Which is why you don't want to game plan like he's Dan Fouts.
Quite frankly I don’t give a rat’s ass if anyone agrees with the following or not. But, there are huge inconsistencies in NFL officiating.
So, riddle me this. Routt has a single incident and is out of the game. Mack instigated two skirmishes and probably a third he was not penalized for. Stays in the game. Richard Seymour penalized for disagreeing with a call. Yeah, he may not have expressed himself in the most pleasant of terms, but what would you have him do, kneel and kiss the ring of the official and beg forgiveness.
Over the years the Raiders have brought officials into camp, changed coaching techniques in the middle of the damn season because "suddenly" a technique they used all season became holding at a most critical time in the game.
Joe Bugle known for low penalties by the lines he coached. Didn't help with the Raiders. Back to the Skins and bingo, low penalties. Al Davis is rarely at practices, so unless he is having secret meetings with players in undisclosed locations, it ain't him.
Seymour and Ellis didn’t become sloppy undisciplined players just because they put on a different jersey. Yet, just from observation one would think so.
Offensive pass interference? Murphy has got to be wondering why it's ok for other receivers to push off but not him, and why he has to be mugged and wacked about the head to get an interference call.
There is a public perception that certain teams are treated differently. Example: Miami, even when they are crap and have no talent, are amongst the lowest penalized in the league no matter the coach. John Gruden worked his ass off to lower penalties with the Raiders. Didn't work. He goes to Tampa and bingo, his techniques for lowering penalties work great.
You have to kill too many people for conspiracies to work, so don’t go there. But, I believe NFL officials have bigger egos than your average college official, and have more biases because of their closer familiarity with the teams. "I think that was holding and it was the Raiders (or some other team), so it must have happened." Conversely, some teams get the benefit of the doubt.
And, penalties were down this year and trending that way. Then, for some strange reason, the last four weeks have gotten weird. Just when we started playing better overall.
Until then we were ranked 10th in the league for fewest penalties. Tied with the Dolts and trending downward. Then 9, 14, 9, 13. Bam we are at number 28 while the Dolts are sitting at number 7. I’m not buying the team went stupid for no apparent reason. Washington, as crappy as they are, sit at number 10. Hell, the Chefs are 8 and the Geldings are 18, basically no change.
Taunting on Miller? If that was taunting then every first down celebration where the receiver is signaling a first down is taunting. He’s got to be pointing at someone.
What you saw yesterday from the players was frustration of three weeks of near 11 penalties per game after going all season averaging less than 6. Our opponents are averaging less than 1 penalty difference between first half and second half of the season while we are seeing ours skyrocket. Include the fact that the Triplette crew from yesterday is amongst the most flag happy in the league, and you are going to get a lot of pent up frustration with the players who are busting their collective asses only to see good play after good play taken away, while seeing the other team not called for some of the same things.
In the last six games we have moved the ball effectively, had a positive time of possession and in general played fairly well except for a sudden inexplicable jump of over 5 penalties per game in the last four weeks.
I’m not saying the officials cost us the game, far from it. But, it’s just too spooky that when we change QB’s and start playing better, going 3-2 over one stretch that we start seeing more flags than confetti at a New Year’s Party.
JMNLHSO
H
If I was the opponent, reading about how the Raiders are always saying the officials are picking on them, I would do exactly what the Browns did, I would start chipping away and then watch them lose their composure by retaliating.
It's a known fact in the NFL that the retaliator, not the instigator, usually draws the flag.
Combine that with an undisciplined team that has a lot of excuses but little composure, and you have a recipe for what happened yesterday.
Then the zebras get trigger happy and start hallucinating things, and next thing you know, we're getting our a*** kicked by the Browns.
I wouldn't be surprised if Rob Ryan advised Mangini and the team to chip away at the Raiders with cheap stuff, knowing that they would lose their composure.
I'm not making excuses for the zebras. It's just that I'm tired of excuses, period.
Take,
I'm tired of excuses also. It also pisses me off to hear the head of officiating cover for bad officiating by saying "If you had just scored six more points you would have won." Or "The team had it's chances to make plays and didn't" or, "Officiating has zero affect on the outcome of a game," when we damn well know they have.
But, I'm also tired of seeing our guys held and interferred with and nothing being called. And, hearing the guys in the booth going, "I just don't see it" or "That's a bit too picky." Or have them wonder why one play was looked at in the last two minutes of a half and another wasn't. When, in both cases, it worked in the oppositions favor.
Or, in one case in the Washington game the announcer made a point that Cable sure didn't get any breaks from the officials while Washington seemed to.
My point is, you don't get stupid overnight in that department.
H
This is the story of our season, no watch, we will probably beat Baltimore next week!
My last post on previous take:
WE ARE WHO WE THOUGHT WE WERE!
53 men crammed into a big ass clown car (Gallery's slick ride maybe?).
Abandoning the run near the goal line was stupid IMHO. I would have atleast tried a run on 3rd. Sure it was nearing 4minutes, but I bet it would have scored.
Frye just doesn't have an arm, kind of a shame.
Oh well. At least our odds are better against the Ravens, ain't that some crazy chit? Chances are it's 7-11 time. If we do win, what's the current record for most 10 loss season? Tampa might have that one set pretty high.
-moshbucket
H -
"Seymour and Ellis didn’t become sloppy undisciplined players just because they put on a different jersey."
Maybe they did to some degree. Seymour probably never pulled anyone's hair before he played for the Raiders. The Raiders seem to bring out the worst in players. Maybe it's just out of frustration from losing, but unprofessional nonetheless.
Miller's taunting call was because he tried to spike the ball, not for pointing. It was more the motion of his hands than the action of the ball, which slipped out of Miller's hands and fell weakly to the ground; thus, making it a bad call by the official.
The refs were gambling on that game. No question in my mind.
---Jeff
Maybe Cable was gambling on the game, that might explain the four pass plays from the two-yard line with the game on the line.
In response to last week's post, I was strongly advocating the need to keep Tom Cable as our head coach. Though I won't change my tune here, I will say this, the Brown's game was by far his worst game as a play-caller. I simply don't get why Cable can't figure out how to use Bush and McFadden properly. Maybe it's not as easy as we think, but you can't overlook Bush averaging five yards a pop. How does that not factor into the second half of a cold weather game, and at the two yard line with four plays to punch it in? My only guess is Cable was thinking about the clock, saving time, so he dialed up passing plays.
Again, I'm not going to go fair-weather here and say we need to axe Cable. But this game has raised a couple of red flags, mainly the misuse of our backfield, which seems to be a running theme.
Tim
Or maybe Frye was gambling on the game with all those INTs.
Seriously, RT, do you not wonder why the refs start sucking hind tit when it's a Raider game?
Not even pretending that the Raiders played well--but the refs gave Cleveland the game on that one series, let alone the rest of the game. I'll believe otherwise when I'm able to see replays of the supposed rule-breaking.
---Jeff
NYRaider,
I ain't buying it. Not for a minute. Just changing jerseys doesn't change the player you have been for the past six years, period. You don't walk in and say, "Ok, I play for the Raiders now, so I have to play crappy and make a lot of penalties."
I didn't say Miller was pointing at anything. My point was when players make a good play then point at someone they occasionally get flagged for taunting.
Plus, if that was an attempted spike it was pretty pitiful. It basically rolled down his leg and off his knee. If anything he was going to spike the ball, saw the player on the ground and changed his mind. It was pretty pathetic taunting.
And why don't we get to see what Routt did, and what the contact with the official actually consisted of, or what Seymour actually said. No, they have to protect the refs. And, why was Mack allowed to stay in the game when he instigated things multiple times.
Frye's interceptions had more to do with the loss than the penalties. And, we should have run Bush at least twice on the goal line. But, we had over 100 more yards than the Brownies.
Collectively the team never gave in. But, after flag 9 or 10 they became more tentative.
5-6 penalties, which is what they had been averageing prior to the last four weeks, and they have an even shot at winning. The Brownies were less than 2 above their season average. In other words, about normal for them.
And, Take, it is an indictment of the officials if a team uses as part of their planning to start something knowing the call will probably go against the opposition.
H
Oh, how I long for the days when the referees could screw us in the playoffs, instead of in Cleveland in the twilight of our seventh consecutive season of record-breaking losing.
The days when the refs could screw us and our qualified head coach and our qualified GM and our smart free-agent pickups and our sensible game plans.
Don't forget the days when we had the personnel and the coaching to win regardless of the reffing.
---Jeff
We can't long for those days, or mention them. They are too far in the past.
H
Arkansas,
We overcame the refs against the Squeelers and Geldings. They had to make sure this time.
H
H - I agree the officiating was overly bad, but I've seen non-Raiders games that were equally as bad.
Bottom line is, the players have to be smarter. E.g., on the play that Seymour was flagged for offsetting personal fouls, I saw Routt push Anderson (the Brown's QB) away from the scuffle. Doesn't matter what Anderson did to Routt, that's just dumb! He didn't get flagged for it, but he managed to get kicked out of the game anyway.
And what about the follow-up personal foul against Seymour after the same play? Didn't the Patriots teach him to back away from the officials after the call has been made?
I guess the real mystery call that nobody seems to have seen was the contact of an official by Stewart that got him ejected.
So the officiating was bad, what else is new. The Raiders simply weren't up to the task.
Up to the meltdown the following penalities had been called:
1st Qtr:
Holding on Green
False Start on Morris
2nd Qtr:
Interference with Oppportunity to Catch on Cleveland
Offsides on Kelly
Holding on Morris
Offensive Holding on Cleveland (there was also an Unnecessary Roughness on Cleveland that was declined)
4 against the Raiders, but two were motion penalities (offsides and the false start)
2 against Cleveland
Up to this point seems to me the game wasn't overly officated.
Then the meltdown:
4 yard run
Timeout Oakland
2 yard run
--Unsportsmanlike Conduct on Cleveland
17 yard run
--Unnecessary Roughness on Seymour and Unnecessary Roughness on Cleveland
--Unsportsmanlike Conduct on Seymour
14 yard pass
4 yard run
--Unnecessary Roughness on Routt, ejected from game
Incomplete pass
8 yard run
19 yard TD
This series of events for me is a microcosm of everything that is wrong with the Raiders. Cable did not call a timeout to calm his defense down. And if it was a bogus call on Routt, Cable didn't argue. The defense fell part and allowed a TD - so a close game (10-6) became an insurmountable deficit. And after the game there was no accountability on the players part for losing focus and compusure (it was the officials fault)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/27/SPF41B9TI1.DTL
No leadership. No accountability. No traction in building upon the previous win. The Raiders reverted to form.
It wasn't until that series of plays that the flags began to fly in earnst. But personally I only see the Raiders to blame. They lost their cool, composure and let the offensive line of the Browns get to them. Seymour even admitted on the U.R. call he hit his teammate by accident, which one could assume (or at least hopefully assume) he was actually aiming for a Brown. So he swung and missed, but the point is he swung. And at least I believe there is a middle ground between Seymour kneeling and kissing Triplett's ring and getting a Unsportsmanlike Conduct flag thrown because he crossed a line in voicing his disapproval. Like perhaps calmly and respectfully stating his case.
The most egregious call was against Miller. Which was pretty much made-up by the P.I. in the endzone later in the drive. Which of course led to the infamous 4 passing plays or actually the 4 consecutive incomplete passes.
I don't buy into the whole the Raiders get jobbed more than other teams. The NFL has way too much to lose to have a mandate to screw the Raiders or allow officials with personal axes to grind to free reign. Or that the referees are throwing flags for personal gain.
Occam's razor would say that rather than a vast conspiracy against the Raiders to make sure they don't play well, involving all sorts of malefice at every level of the NFL and any entity associated with the NFL; but instead as Raider's fans we watch more Raider's games and see more calls go against them.
Anyway, one more game and then it will be over. And we can look forward to an offseason that hopefully will be productive with the hiring of a GM, a new coaching staff and an awesome draft, which hopefully will start with Suh!
Have a safe and happy New Year Raider Takers or would that be Takees?
:-)
NYRaider,
Bottom line for me.
If the officiating is overly bad, then it's overly bad, and we have every right to grip, complain, bitch or whatever adjective you wish to place on it.
Further, if it is overly bad, wouldn't you think the NFL would want to do something about it?
It doesn't appear so. Quite frankly, I didn't have much in the way of complaints the first 11 or so games. It was pretty evenly called games.
But, as soon as we start showing an ability to move the ball and put points on the board the refs step in. It's a bit hard to say it's just a coincidence.
Next week should be interesting from an officiating standpoint. The Black Sparrows are also at the bottom in penalties. We weren't, we were at #10, until four weeks ago.
H
Yes, there is often very bad officiating on other teams as well. But not so often when those teams are playing the Raiders.
The fact is, regarding officials (and it's worse than it's ever been in history, as far as I can tell), the refs are not professionals. This is not their full time gig. The NFL refuses to have professional officials.
These guys are biased, and officiate with their own agenda - period. And the NFL protects these calls like they are commandments from God. Players and coaches are never allowed to question, and if they do they are heavily fined. Network announcers are highly discouraged from commenting because they may find that their network doesn't get the next contract.
As officiating in the NBA has already been shown to be subject to gambling influences, I can't believe that the same thing does not go on in the NFL. Frankly, I think that if the NFL found out about such a thing, they'd bend over backwards to cover it up.
I was trying to teach a friend football over the weekend - attempting to bring a new fan to the NFL. That person wondered why anyone would bother to watch something that is completely directed by referee bias. I tried to provide an answer to that, but I couldn't find one.
Perhaps this is why pro football is slowly losing viewers who are turning, instead, to the NCAA.
Ark, stop yer whining about the refs. The refs aren't the reason the Raiders have been a losing and undisciplined organization for the most part of the last 20 years, nor are they a excuse for Al's poor handling of the team. Al's apologists whine far too much about refereeing when there are far important issues affecting the play of this team.
And again, if refs are throwing flags in an attempt to "get under control" either team, they are acting with bias! In fact, that's the very definition of bias.
Something is either a foul or it's not a foul! No matter which team commits it! I am aware of no legitimate flag that can be thrown to "get a team under control." Refs determining to focus on ONE team and not the other is BIAS!
To say otherwise is to determine that bias plays a legitimate role in the NFL. And in that case, why both to watch? Unless you are only curious to find out which team will be the brunt of bias from one week to the next.
Sorry, but the Raiders suck not because of the refs, but because of Al Davis's handling of the team and his stubborn refusal to bring contemporary and knowledgeable football men into the organization. Since Al generally refuses to support a disciplined environment, sloppy play and penalties will remain the norm.
Blanda, TV ratings for the NFL are up this season by quite a large number. The Washing Post referred to those numbers as "soaring." I think you need to do more research before making all of these wild assertions of yours; for instance, the idea you presented that Marc Wilson only played one full season, when in fact he has started over 50 games for the Raiders.
Thanks for playing though.
-JC
Yeah, of course. Al Davis is responsible for everything bad that ever happens, and destroys all good in the world. Now let's have a serious discussion.
Take, you're right that the Raiders used to overcome bad officiating MORE OFTEN. But they've never been successful at doing it all of the time.
Lest you forget, there are probably a few more Super Bowls that we could have participated in were it not for BIASED officiating.
"The Snow Job" in NE. The "Immaculate Deception" in Pittsburgh. The non-fumble call in Denver in 1977.
Without biased officiating we would likely have at least two more wins this season alone. We would not then be looking at another double digit loss season.
Blanda, that's a strawman and you know it. In fact, it seems that's often your preferred method of argument. We're talking about how Al runs the Raiders and nothing else. Shall I go over the facts again, or will you ever provide evidence of your consistent record of predictions concerning the Raiders play?
Marc Wilson had exactly ONE season where he started the majority of the season and finished the season as a starter.
Guess what! You can start games and still not be listed as the "Starting QB" for the team. Yeah, amazing isn't it? Sometimes the "starter" gets injured, and the backup has to start.
Do you consider Charlie Frye the starting QB for the Raiders? After all, he will have started at least three games.
When you have something less idiotic to throw around, let me know.
Ummm Blanda, nice try. You used that argument as proof that JaMarcus might be gone next season. Your assertion was that Al doesn't stick with #1 pick QB's for a long time when they play poorly, when in fact Al kept Wilson for 6 years, where he played in over 50 games. Not only that, Al in fact gave him a new multi-million dollar contract 3-4 years in. And you're calling what I said idiotic. WTF? You make up shit off the top of your head constantly and then move the goal post when you've been proved wrong. If you want to discuss facts, fine. But if you're going to make up shit, I'm going to call you on it.
And FYI, Wilson won the starting job more than one season Blanda, as I explained before. Al didn't renegotiate Wilson's contract to make him a back-up. Wilson was injured on several occasions and Plunkett played well enough to keep the job.
The 'Charlie Frye' lob is another strawman. We're talking about Marc Wilson, not Charlie Frye. Those are two completely different scenarios. You can Google the Marc Wilson Sports Illustrated article for more information, or you can choose to remain ignorant.
Why don't look at what I say, and not make things up. Wilson did not show that he was incapable until he was given one full year as the starter - and that was ONE season.
He was named the starter after the start of the '83 season, but only started three games - his stint ended by injury. But he played very well in two of those three games, and played hurt in the last one. Plunkett was named the starter again in '84. Then Wilson was named the starter in '85. He completed that season by losing to NE. When the league figured out his weakness, he became ineffective and was never again made the starter. He was released after his contract ran out.
However, he DID start some games after that, but only because Plunkett was either injured or ineffective. But even then he played, sporadically okay. Do you doubt that?
In Bo Jackson's debut against Seattle, Wilson was the starter. The film for that is available on-line. Take a look at that and tell me how badly Wilson played in that game. I'd suggest that he was as responsible for that win as Bo Jackson.
from the media:
"Defensive end Greg Ellis said the Raiders had demonstrated to officials they were an undisciplined team and were treated in kind the rest of the afternoon."
That pretty much sums it up. When you act professional, you get treated like a pro. Doesn't make it right; it's just human nature.
You also can't compare Russell to Wilson. Wilson was not named the starter until after his 3rd NFL season had begun. He was given a new contract BECAUSE he was going to be named the starter, and he'd played - up to that point - extremely well off the bench.
It wasn't until AFTER the '85 season that Wilson's flaws were discovered - after he'd been on the team for FIVE seasons.
The plan for Russell was to be the starter from the beginning. It was hoped that Russell would pick up this year from where he left off last year. He was given EVERY opportunity to succeed. He failed. He's been benched. A large question looms as to whether he can recover the starting position next season.
There are NO similarities here with Wilson. Only in your bad analogy.
"Defensive end Greg Ellis said the Raiders had demonstrated to officials they were an undisciplined team and were treated in kind the rest of the afternoon."
"That pretty much sums it up. When you act professional, you get treated like a pro. Doesn't make it right; it's just human nature."
That's also BIAS. Something to be avoided by PROFESSIONALS!
Like me, Greg Ellis is trying to put a stop to the excusing and enabling. Like me, he's losing the battle.
TV viewership is not the measure of a sport's popularity. Anyone can have a TV on in the house and not even be watching the game. What counts to most teams is how many fannies are in the seats, and that is way down this year. I can't remember so many blackouts league-wide. Even the game yesterday, that was listed as a "sell-out" looked to be about two thirds full.
Greg Ellis is "excusing" BIAS.
Uhh RT... Stewart got thrown out for getting punched in the face.
Not sure how you would react after getting punched in the face, but the LAST thing I'd do is criticize you for it.
Routt is a different story, and Cable was remiss for not sitting him to cool him down.
I don't expect Stewart to expect the special "One Free Punch to any Raider Player" exemption.
Also.. the reason Bush stopped getting caries was because we needed two TD's to win the game for most of the second half, and for the most part, passing was working (hence the 333 yards of passing) just a hint.
As far as referee bias... I don't think it is a league-wide problem, but it seems one of every third crew EXPECTS the Raiders to be a problem, and thus makes ticky-tack calls against the Raider players while ignoring the same thing on the other side (perhaps because they are too busy watching Raider players to notice).
Like I said.. its not every crew (hell, I think we even got a beneficial crew against the Bronc's) but there are clearly crews that are LOOKING to throw flags against the Raiders before they even start playing. That is BIAS and it is not fair, and DESERVES to be criticized.
RT, football is a violent game where often the victor is the toughest SOB on the field. If you are being told by the refs that you must take punches, but never deliver them, you may as well go home. You're going to get your ass run over.
Stop excusing and enabling official bias.
Gary, I agree. The Denver game seemed like it was officiated very well. Both teams were allowed to play the game. Funny... We won that game.
The 'ref conspiracy' line is getting pretty old, and it's sad to watch such poor form from the Al apologists.
Blanda and H I couldn't agree more, we are a team that has no leadership in any department and the officials indeed are making bad calls, I know we use to overcome the officiating problems most of the times but a lot of times we did not, like you said Blanda the snow job in ne was a bad call and we lost that game because of it, another non call was when the pig fell on top of Gannon ruining his career and didn't even got a personal foul for it, the "no catch" on Louis Murphy against the dolts and on and on and on.
Make no mistakes we suck because we lack leadership from the front office all the way to the water boy, but in my eyes the officials shouldn't be the ones determining a game, the players should be.
The point is, the Raiders sometimes bring it upon themselves.
On Sunday, the refs were given cause to call personal fouls on Seymour, Routt and Stewart.
Stewart said he swiped an officials' hand off his chest (as a defensive move) after confronting the official about being punched by a Browns' player. If so, he could get fined by the NFL, but that won't sway some here in believing Stewart was a victim of a bad call.
It's funny though, isn't it? I know that Rout was accused of a head butt, but it was never shown. The same for Stuart and the same for Seymour. Seems to me that if they were obvious, they'd be shown - no? Miller's "taunting" was shown as our proof, but it could only make you laugh.
Also funny is that Seymour who comes from a team that is argued to get bias in their favor, now talks about the "Raider's mystique." Perhaps we should be listening to the guy who's seen it from both sides.
RT, you need to check yourself.
Calling out the refs for their flagrant behavior is in no way excusing or enabling any Raiders' behavior. I already said that the Raiders have their own problems, and this was added to by the refs.
Someone else said something stupid, but I wouldn't know for sure because I have JC plonked now in more than one forum.
That is all.
---Jeff
Arkansan, I just don't like swabbing decks on the Titanic.
The more we worry about the officials (something we can't control), the less we focus on what we can control, which is our collective composure and our organizational behavior.
Greg Ellis is right.
I don't mind talking about the zebras as a side story, AFTER we have sufficiently covered the main story, which is the fact that we laid a performance egg in Cleveland.
But I wake up this morning and look at the comments, and it's all about the refs? Come on.
Sure the refs call the Raiders tight...many games I have seen the bias.
But, ONCE AGAIN, why is this bias put on the Raiders? Tell us ole mighty one on the white horse coming to save the day... The Black jersey's? Cause the team is from Oakland? Cause of the reputation from the 70's ( I know this one will be Blunda's choice)? Can anyone tell us why the refs hate the Raiders?
JONES
Understood, RT. However, it is exactly because we're already messed up enough without the refs' help that their horrible officiating gets under my skin like it does.
Of course, the other thing is that I've already seen plenty of discussion on other boards having to do with our own problems before I get here. The other stuff has been hashed and re-hashed but not as much about the reffing *in this game*, so I chose to talk about that.
Note that my take on reffing *for this game* is only one among many takes I have *for this game*. I reserve the right to complain about all the other stuff that's out of my control, as well.
---Jeff
Well, what gets under my skin is Al apologists; they are always looking for excuses other than Al himself. Ark just said here not to long ago that JaMarcus was going to be a great QB. Does he still buy into such nonsense?
Jones, the answer to your ? is frickon Pete Rozelle.
Fair enough, Arkansan. You have perspective on the matter.
It's when Blanda starts calling out Greg Ellis for stating the obvious and for saying the right thing, that's when I start to lose it.
Enough of the whining about the refs ... there is nothing more pathetic than a Raider fan making excuses for a loss. The fact is that the Raiders didn't earn the right to hang a "W" in the column.
Yesterday's game was the worst of all worlds ... bad coaching, bad officiating, and a lack of discipline by the players.
I can deal with some bad calls by the officiating crew and lack of discipline by players since it isn't the reason we lost.
However, Cable had arguably his worst game as a coach.
* Cable's goal line playcalling.
(What, a former OLine coach doesn't have a "bread and butter run play for 2 yards with a BIG back who averages 5.0 per carry?)
* Cable's useage of Bush
(1 carry the last 20 minutes of playing time ... total mismanagment of personnel)
* Cable not challenging a punt at the 1/2 yard line when it is the 1st half and he would still have 1 challenge left for the 2nd half
(no need to save a timeout in the 1st half.)
Get ready for the Jim Fassell era for this upcoming decade.
Pete Rozelle..LOL..= too funny.
A dead man still haunts Al Davis...The Raiders are being persecuted because of the wish of a dead man. Pete....what are your last words..." F... Al Davis" and so it was done...
Pete Rozelle, if you are reading this....Al didn't mean it..can you give him a break? Al is just human, we all make mistakes, why curse the Raider nation for the action of just one man? Come on Pete, do it for the good of the NFL, the league needs a big bad Raider team that pillages and plunders....do it for the Nation
JONES
But why is it that Adrian Peterson and Schianko from Minesota can spike the ball and not get a penalty but Miller can?
Let's call an ace of spades an ace of spades and right now the league has a vendetta against the Raiders.
He who does not see it is either blind or living in a fantasy world.
The Raiders are in the top 10 for most penalized teams every season not because of some "vendetta." No, they are penalized because Al Davis doesn't believe in a disciplined environment for his players. This has come from his own mouth.
Now knock off all of this whiny conspiracy crap. Pete Rozelle??? He's dead fer chrissakes.
Onan, I guess you can't take a frickon joke. But I still think it's Pete's fault.
"the league has a vendetta against the Raiders."
There are literally thousands of independent decisions made by Raiders managment, coaches, and players every FN' season that dictates Ws and Ls.
These decisions on who to hire, who to draft, who to take in free agency, what D to run, what plays are called, distribution of playing time, how practice is conducted etc. are what EVERY organization controls.
As soon as the Raiders make winning the #1 priority, make solid decisions on the things they control, and field a worthy product, I will gladly get in line to bitch about a "bad" call by the ref. Until then, "vendettas" is nothing more than sour grapes, enabling, and lame ass, unsubstantiated BS and you know it.
If you want to get real ... the Raiders have a "vendetta" against themselves by the way they've botched key decisions, bought into the losing culture, and have shown ZERO accountability.
Shouldn't the owner of the Raiders be accountable for how the GM has performed? Shouldn't the owner be accountable for the HCs he hired? players drafted? players signed to FA contracts? Attendance? PR? Marketing? Merchandise sales? Cap space? Wins and losses? It is Al Davis team. He has the right to do whatever he pleases. I get it. He is also accountable for 7 consecutive double digit losses.
Brett Favre just spycked the ball at the end of the game in frustration and no penalty, oh but like Blanda says bias is the name of the game for the officials!
Bad officiating is a league-wide problem. Those who actually watch other teams know this is true. If every call in the last seven years went the Raiders’ way, they’d still be losers. It’s time to focus on the real problems facing this team.
Time for the minority owners to stage a coup.
Onadonadon,
If you are going to make a statement, then show us where anyone has said the refs are the “reason” for the current team troubles. You won’t find it. You won’t find “conspiracy” either, but you will find “bias”. If we get under your skin, don’t read us. Save your ulcer for something else. Also, if you have been reading here the last several years you would find many post by Blanda, I and others where we disagreed with and criticized Al Davis. You just have selective memory. Plus, until 4 weeks ago we were in the top 10 fewest penalized teams and top 3 in fewest penalty yards.
NYRaider,
And the initial calls early on against Cleveland demonstrated what, that we were just bullying them and the refs needed to make us stop? Players, coaches and owners get hit big in the wallet if they say anything negative about officiating. There are other teams with their problems with the crew we had on Sunday. But, it won’t matter because the league says they will address these things and every year it’s the same old crews back. Ed Hochuli made two very bad calls last season that cost teams games. He is also the leader of one of the most flag happy crews in the NFL. Was anything done? Nope.
“On Sunday, the refs were given cause to call personal fouls on Seymour, Routt and Stewart.” Mack was flagged multiple times. Routt and Stewart were ejected.
There are patterns, both in the performance of the team and in officiating. So, for the first 11 games we averaged 5.5 penalties per game for 40.4 penalty yards per game (third in the league). One of our best stretches in years.
We change quarterbacks, beat a division leader, play fairly well statistically against the Cowgirls even though we didn’t score well, win a game against the defending champions, start actually scoring touchdowns. Suddenly we have gone from the 5.5 and 40.1 over 11 games to 11.25 penalties and 94 penalty yards per game. Meanwhile, all other teams remain fairly static with where they were during the year.
During the 11 game stretch we were averaging about one more penalty than our opponents, during the last 4 we are averaging over 5 more than our opponents.
Something about all of that doesn’t compute. The team didn’t wake up December 6th and say “I’m tired of these low penalty totals. I think I’ll start holding and interfering.”
Take,
What about Cleveland’s initiation of personal fouls early on? Why weren’t they held to the same scrutiny the remainder of the game? Why was Mack allowed to remain in the game after multiple personal fouls?
And, maybe Seymour is ticked during the game because he’s saying to himself, “We weren’t flagged for some of these things in Foxboro.”
You have said over and over there is a pattern to our problems, and that is true. The stats point to a pattern in officiating. We can lose just fine on our own, we don’t need assistance from officials. I’ve always said, “If we are guilty flag us. Just do the same for the other guys and stop this benefit of the doubt crap.”
When you get to the playoffs announcers will say “In the post season they tend to let the players play.” Madden has said it. Does that make it right? All of a sudden it’s ok to ignore some things. And, how do you choose what to ignore? What makes it a penalty in the regular season and not in the post season and why is that ok?
Calico,
I’m not blaming the loss on the refs, nor am I saying they are the reason for our troubles. Hell, the first 11 games were as evenly called as one could ask for. We lost quite well on our own.
The last four games, however, leaves one to scratch their head and wonder. The personnel and coaches during the first 11 games are the same, only one thing has changed.
H
The time has come for the fans of the Raiders to shake things up.
The great "Silver & Black" hype now has to put on a show; and yet they continue to fail. I'm not buying the hype anymore.
The first thing that needs to change (as discussed here throughout this past off-season) is the need for a General Manager. Al Davis must step aside in the "Football operations" of his team. Sure, he can have his say and share his opinions; but he has to concede that the game has changed. Yes, he is right, that the base defensive/offensive schemes are still used; but they are also modified to help these plays progress.
The second thing that needs to change is Tom Cable handing the Offensive Play-calling to someone else (assuming he remains as Head Coach). His play-calling alone has cost us 4 or 5 games this year; starting with week 1 and 8 against the Dolts; Week 10 against the Chiefs; Week 14 against the Redskins (remember, we were down 17-13 at the start of the 4th Quarter); and this last week against the BrownTrouts.
Third, the attitude of the team has to change. Ellis said it best, if you act unprofessional, you will be treated unprofessionally. We continue to whine about the "Snow Job" playoff game; but the Raiders still had 5 more plays to stop the Patriots after that call; and instead of coming back after the call with another Corner Blitz; we went into a prevent and lost the game. Yes, it took wind out of our sails; but champions use that to motivate themselves to find the knock out punch. The Raiders were content to complain about that flag; instead of finishing the Pats off.
You look at the history of the NFL, and who complains about the refs more than any other team? That's right, Al Davis and the Silver & Black. Yes, there are times I feel we were screwed; but the thing that needs to change is the attitude to give up when it happens; because guess what; it's going to happen.
But this attitude cannot change unless the first 2 changes take place first. Attitude starts with the leadership; and change starts with the leadership. Al Davis is a cat who refuses to change; and as long as he continues to be the GM, the Raiders will be no different than they are right now.
Al, thanks for the memories and how you have made this team great; but it is time to quit living in the past glories. Past glories are irrelevant if there is no present success. This decade ends on a sour note for a team that at the beginning of this decade showed promise of a dynasty; and another decade of Raider dominance. If the Raiders are going to continue to be great, and regain the title of the "Most Winningest Team in Sports History" then changes need to be made; and the change begins with you.
I think you are an outstanding Owner; one (who in the typical Godfather fashion) has said he refuses to be a puppet on a string. I think you are one of the most brilliant marketers and innovators of our age. But its time to change, my friend, in order to regain the greatness of the Raiders. It's not that the game has passed you by; regardless of what the mediots say; but your part in the game is becoming unappreciated by all you led here. Glory doesn't come without sacrifice, and we (the fans, players, and coaches) have done our parts; and now your sacrifice is the one of change. With that, I say again, "Thanks for the memories; help us let these memories grow stronger with our future glories with the sacrifice of stepping out."
RaiderNate, great take, do you mind if I put it on the front page as a guest take?
H, I do feel that the Raiders sometimes get a raw deal. But that is not my main concern right now. My main concern is this:
"I think he knows that he should."
-- John Madden, in Sunday's New York Post, asked by columnist Steve Serby if Oakland owner and close Madden friend Al Davis should hire a football czar."
I saw several bad or non calls on Monday Night football, such as a blatant block in the back that wasn't called.
Peterson got his face mask yanked when he fumbled in OT, which cost them the game. I saw him interviewed afterward, he didn't mention it.
At one point earlier in the game, a Vikings linebacker drove one of the Bears into the ground at the end of a play. The Bears player jumped up and pushed into his grill. I thought the linebacker might push back, but instead, he put up his hands as the guy banged into him, to show the official he wasn't retaliating.
Jon Gruden said, "He's a rookie, but that's a veteran movie right there."
Precisely. But we have veterans who act like rookies in that situation.
Nate,
“The Raiders were content to complain about that flag; instead of finishing the Pats off.”
It wasn’t a flag. It was a decision to reverse the call on the field because Walt Coleman spent more than the allotted time under the hood to find the nano second he claims is proof it was a tuck. Plus, it was his interpretation of Brady’s actions. It was a subjective call. Further, it’s very hard to pull off a disruptive play like that back to back when the other team is looking for it.
This is what I want. I want Al Davis to hire some help. I’ve said that for years. But, when he does, people here will moan, groan and wring their hands that he made the wrong choice. For many, he will receive zero credit until he hires who they want, drafts who they want and signs the free agents they want. In other words, they should be running the team instead of the senile old bastard.
I didn’t agree with the first round selections the past two drafts. Last time I checked I’m not on Mr. Davis’ speed dial. Both times a player I preferred was available.
I also want something else. Consistency in officiating. Call it if it’s obvious, and call it the same for both teams. That is something that is lacking in the NFL, and not just for the Raiders.
In the SEC this year, they suspended a crew and issued specific guidelines to all the other crews and officiating got better immediately. If the NFL had done something like that to Ed Hocuili last season we might not be having this discussion. But, they didn’t and the crap continues to happen.
H
H -
"But, when he does (hire a GM), people here will moan, groan and wring their hands that he made the wrong choice."
It's more than a hire, it's perhaps the most important hire in the history of the Raiders since Davis was hired. Let's hope, if and when he hires a GM, he puts more effort into the process than he has his last, what, six or seven head coaches.
There are many here that think Davis will hire a GM, but I'm not one of them. IMO, he will go into next season as remaining supreme leader (a.k.a. captain of the Titanic).
Apparently, the Browns feel the Raiders went too far.
http://tinyurl.com/ych5rft
H, here, here!
If several of you folks would like to actually read my posts, I SAID that the officiating was BAD LEAGUE WIDE! I identified a problem - that the NFL officials were NOT professional, subject to bias, poorly trained with little in the way of standardized practice. I identified a solution. I said that the league has to incorporate a system where refs are FULL TIME and PROFESSIONAL and INDEPENDANT of the NFL corporate offices.
And, yes, I specifically criticized the bias against the Raiders. Everyone here knows that it exists because the refs prove that it does every season. Is it because of a league-wide conspiracy? I never said that. I have my own theories as to why it exists - and some of that has to do with the way Al Davis runs things - but BIAS is BIAS and MUST be eliminated in order for the entire NFL to maintain credibility.
I'm getting really tired to being told I've said things that I've never said. But around here, it seems, you have to be an "Al Davis - bad, GM good!" broken record. Otherwise single minded simpletons get their panties in a wad.
Also, if you want to quote John Madden reflecting on what Al's thoughts are, you can take that to the bank. Nobody is closer to Al than John Madden. If he says that Al is aware that he needs to bring in help, then Al's aware of it - AND, he's likely looking for a solution.
But then, that might put "Al Davis - BAD! GM - good!" on hold for a bit until we see what Al's got in mind. We can't have that. Where would the fun be?
After reflecting on the issue I can tell you why Al Davis would not, and should not (it's moot because he's been hired by DC) re-hire Bruce Allen.
While Allen was here he almost exclusively focused on bringing in veterans on the verge of retirement. Jon Gruden exacerbated the problem by failing to develop young talent. As a result, when the veterans retired we had noting left as a foundation. And that is ONE of the reasons we've been floundering in the wilderness.
I believe that Bruce Allen's performance with the Raiders represents his primary philosophy of personnel management, and that it is a part of his family lineage. His father, George Allen, led "the Over the Hill Gang" when he was the HC/GM for the Redskins. The same thing that has happened to the Raiders happened to the Redskins. I doubt that it's a coincidence.
NYRaider,
Sounds like whining to me.
A quote from the article, "I hit my own teammate," Seymour told the Plain Dealer, "He went out to make to make a tackle and I hit him. The referee was behind him and didn't see what happened. The film will show it all. He's human and mistakes happen."
If Seymour is correct, this is one of my major complaints about officiating. They make calls based on assumptions, not what they can or cannot see. If the official's view was blocked the flag should have stayed in his pocket.
On the SEC team that was suspended, one of the officials publically admided he threw a flag for a 15 yard penalty when he did not clearly see the incident. He also publically admitted he was wrong after viewing the video.
You can't just assume something happened. An official should be an eye wittness and shouldn't be guessing.
If you have to have a 30 second conference a penalty, it didn't happen, or at least should be stated that way in any guidelines.
The last three years I have watched a lot more college football than in the past. I would venture to say college officiating is much more consistant than the NFL.
They also announce the replay decisions in a way I like.
1. If it's an overrule, they explain it.
2. If it's close, but not enough evidence they say "The Ruling on the field stands."
3. If it is obviously correct they say, "The ruling on the field is confirmed."
Very few close calls get overruled, and the guy in the booth is making the call.
There are a lot of things the NFL should copy from college in this area, but they won't.
H
Yes, there is bias....yes the refs do call the Raiders like no other team in the league. Have seen it so many times. The Tuck Game....the team was rattled after that call. When YOU KNOW the refs call against you and they come up with a call like that, of course it will take you a few plays to get your head back. They are not robots, talk professionalism all you want, when you know the refs are looking for ANYTHING to bring you down, you know it. At crucial times of a game, that can rattle a team...you cannot deny it, it is a reality that the refs screw the Raiders every chance they get.
That being said....WHY DO THE REFS CONTINUE TO PECK AT THE RAIDERS? WHY?????? Is the league trying to convey a message to Al? Does Al continue his ridiculous way's just to spite the league? Why won't the hero on the white horse address this?
JONES
Officiating is very inconsistent across the league, but the Raiders contribute to their own problems.
Cable: "Defensively, we seemed to kind of lose our composure there at the end of the first half, and I thought it carried over into the second half a little bit."
Cable: "I don't think that you can allow that to become as big a factor as we did." "Don't let those things get to you, because there's going to be things like that in every game.”
Ellis: "I have to say we did it to ourselves because we put the referees on guard against us." "When we do it to ourselves, the ref looks like, 'You know what? We're fed up with these guys.' Any questionable call...."
Jones, I agree that the Raiders seem to get the shortest end of the stick when it comes to officiating.
However, I am in Cable's and Ellis's camp. You deal with it and rise above it.
Also, the fact that the Raiders have a perennial problem with composure is only going to make it worse. The kid on the playground who always loses his composure is going to get the eagle eye from the teacher, that's just life.
I didn't hear Adrian Peterson or the Vikings making excuses for his fumble despite the fact that his face mask got yanked, on a play that decided a game and that cost them potential home field advantage in the playoffs.
Yet here we are whining about some penalties when we threw three picks, passed four times from the two-yard line and stunk up the joint.
This is what we've come to, avoiding mirrors, living on a diet of excuses, paranoid and content with mediocrity.
NYRaider,
Ellis is actually saying the refs were looking at us with more scrutiny. Which, in the world of officiating, shouldn't happen.
If a call/penalty is questionable, it shouldn't be called. If we were a bit rough in the beginning, warn us and give us a chance to settle down which, it appears, Cleveland was allowed to do.
Warn both benches. But, don't try to control us by making calls you "think" happened.
That's inserting yourself into the game.
H
H
Take,
"Also, the fact that the Raiders have a perennial problem with composure is only going to make it worse".
Maybe so, but prennial problems with composure can come from being tired of always being the one under the micorscope. You figure what the hell, no matter what you try or do, you are the one who gets blamed.
Also, if Cable says anything negative in public about the refs, his wallet gets a good deal lighter. Same with players.
So, what else would you have them say.
H
Jones, thanks for the support re the refs.
Here is why, at least partially, I think the bias exists. It comes from several places.
Al Davis, since he's been here, has designed the Raider image. In large part, that image has been stated as, "We don't take what you give us, we take what we want." The image grew from people like Ben Davidson and Otis Sistrunk. The kind of guys who'd tackle you, and then shove your face in the dirt. It's the kind of thing that went on regularly in the NFL, but the Raiders were among the only teams to adopt that image as a matter of pride.
Under Davis, the image was transferred from "Seniors" to Raiders. When other teams would accuse the Raiders to being a "criminal element," the team did little to deny it. This created an "us against the world" mentality on the team.
Essentially the Raiders are "the bad guys" in every stadium across the NFL. That in and of itself can bring out bias in officials which the league, by its officiating structure, allows.
Added to this is the historic conflicts between the commissioner of the old AFL and the NFL. Many of these officials were trained while Rosell was still around. Paid by the NFL, the officials know which side their bread gets buttered. The "tuck" game happened as recently as 2001. It was performed out of NFL bias at the executive level. So there is no doubt it exists. Folks don't need to rent a room to discuss a conspiracy. At this point bias against the Raiders has become traditional.
And to a degree, we will never cure that. The Raiders as a team need to put it aside, and win in spite of it, as they did in every prior decade since Al came to the Raiders. The players need to accept that it happens all the time, and they need to ignore it and move on. As they used to do.
But it's hard to teach that to players who haven't suffered from the "mystique" on other teams. As Cable says, you can't let it get to you.
But none of us should be excusing nor enabling referee bias.
Take...when you KNOW the refs have it in for you, over decades of time...how many times have we seen a Raider game where the refs start their bias and the team deflates? How many times do you see the team try to work through it but the refs continue to make questionable calls until the Raiders start to lose their edge? I have seen too many times to count. Why should the players have to fight through this almost every game? I mean, the players have to get past questionable coaching, poor structure in Alameda and refs who are bias. Now, tell me, how can anyone overcome these odds?
But, this is a reality of playing for the Raiders. I do not say this is whining, this is just stating fact.
THAT BEING SAID....why do the refs have it in for the Raiders? Who do the refs get their instructions from? Everyone is so afraid of being called a Conspiracy Theorist, so no one will touch it.....well, I'm not afraid to touch it.....WHY ARE THE REFS BIASED TOWARDS THE RAIDERS...why will no one touch this question? The only one who would answer, doesn't even leave a name....come on, I want answers to why this is happening.
JONES
Blanda...I am not supporting you, please don't get that crossed with finding the TRUTH. I was hoping someone would say....it's because of Al Davis...which you came close to saying. If you think players from the 70's still have an effect on how the refs call the team today....that is wrong. There is only one constant from then until now....yes H and Blanda and the rest of the crew....it is because of Al Davis = case closed.
JONES
H -
"...if Cable says anything negative in public about the refs, his wallet gets a good deal lighter. Same with players."
True, but why say anything at all? Why throw your own players and your own teammates under the bus if it wasn't accurate? That makes less sense.
Well, Jones, thanks for throwing the olive branch back in my face.
It allows me to say, with comfort, that claiming official bias is all Al Davis' fault is too ridiculous for words. It pretty much backs up my assertion that you believe EVERYTHING is Al's fault.
However, there are times when it's not a matter of bias specifically against the Raiders. It's bias created by other things, such as fear of the local fans. That's why the officials tend to make fewer bad calls against the Raiders when they are at home.
It's primarily the cause of the biased call for the "immaculate deception" in Pittsburgh. Two officials on the field were prepared to rule that an incomplete pass and not a TD. It's part of history that the head official made a call to the booth in order to find out if there was adequate security to get the officiating crew out of the stadium in the case of a hostile crowd. When he was told there wasn't, he went back on the field and ruled a TD.
I'm not a huge believer in the conspiracy theory of the refs out to get the Raiders.
I actually think that Bill Callahan was right - we are the dumbest team in the NFL. The fact that we are annually in the top most penalized teams proves it.
I think it goes back to Davis bringing in jaw-dropping athletes versus character guys.
But I do find it curious when the NFL Network did a Top Ten Most Controversial Calls piece and the Raiders were in five of the Top Ten - including the top two: 1) Immaculate Reception and 2) Tuck Rule. Add the Rob Lytle non-fumble in the 1977 AFC Title game and thats 3 of the most controversial plays in NFL history that kept the Raiders from advancing in the playoffs.
And can you name me one other team in the NFL that has been kept away from the SB three times by obvious bad calls?
>>>
H:
Warn both benches.
>>>>
Anyone else notice that the refs only warned ONE bench on Sunday?
Yup... no bias here!!
And because they only warned one bench, the other team punched someone in the face and even got rewarded by getting him thrown out of the game on top of it.
Yup... no bias here!
Bad calls haven't kept us from the SB these last seven years.
The fact that a high-character guy like Richard Seymour has been short on self-discipline since being a Raider is indicative of the fact the Raiders are an undisciplined team... which is a philosophy that goes right to the top of the organization.
On the Pats, a guy shows up late for a meeting because he got caught in a storm, and he's sent home. Not saying that's right, but at least there's accountability.
Take,
Cable has to say something. It’s a press conference and he will be asked. I would like to know why the flying yellow hankies more than doubled right after we started playing better? The first couple of games were ok, then the refs went berserk.
Tinfoil and others,
This is what I believe happens, and needs to be removed from officiating. Calling penalties based on a team’s reputation real or perceived. There is no conspiracy, but there is perception. Perception creates biases.
I have a perception about Ed Hocuili and, fair or not, I cringe when he does one of our games. But, I have replays and, for the most part, an unconstructed view. Still, I would prefer not to labor under that type of pre conceived fatalism. The refs must make the call immediately. If they cannot see an infraction clearly, then it should not be called. Many times you will see an official who is out of position, make calls they shouldn’t. You will also see officials looking straight at a hold and not call it, when they have made the same call on your team. I once saw Tim Brown get his jersey nearly ripped off in front of the official and there was no call.
In my opinion perception and reputation can, and does, influence an NFL official. That’s why some of the “better” teams get away with crap we and Detroit are not allowed to.
H
NYRaider, we keep getting into these stawman arguments. Nobody has claimed that the last seven years are caused by biased officiating. But it certainly doesn't help, and it tends to discourage a young team, who has no part in the "perceptions" that have been created, in trying to get over the hump.
But it is what is. I personally think that all fans should be arguing about the state of officiating in the NFL and demand changes. But in the short term, that's not going to help the Raiders. It WILL give more credibility to the NFL.
Blanda, glad I could return the favor....also, why must you always reference back to the 70's? Can't you live in the TODAY?
Al Davis is the reason and you know it. It's not the players, they have changed over the years, its' not the coaches = same as the players. So there is only one reason and it is Al Davis. He is being punished through his team, anyone who has been a fan for over 10 years knows this. Pittsburgh is on the opposite of the spectrum, they get many calls in their favor. Anyone who has watched the league, knows that this is REAL. Now I know how all of you want to believe that it could not be that way because it blows your "reality" out of the water....don't you think it is time for a wake up call? Yes the league is corrupt, when so much money is to be made and so much power to be gained, there will ALWAYS be corruption, it's just the nature of the beast.
JONES
Jones, thanks for confirming that there is bias in NFL officiating. And if it's simply directed at Al Davis, that should make Raider fans extremely upset. But not at Davis. He's not the one doing the bad officiating. Performing a vendetta against Davis would be bias at it's absolute worst. And if that's the case, it would tend to make me give up on the NFL, not Davis.
That is the reality of being a Raider fan. I'm not blaming Al for the refs, just stating fact. Al dug his hole with the league a long time ago, he and us are still reaping the "benefits". That is out of anyone's control, BUT, all the dumb shit that Al still is doing to this club...THAT I WILL SAY IS HIS FAULT. It is his fault because he controls it ALL, he has the MAJORITY say in all things that are the Raiders.
Maybe the league keeps rubbing Al's nose in it to try and force him into changing his idea's of how to run the club....maybe if Al turned his direction away from his controlling all that is the Raiders, the ref thing may change, maybe not. "Al we are saying...is to give change a chance....all we are saying, is give change a chance"...sing along to the tune of John Lennon.
JONES
RT, I don't mind you posting that as a guest take.
Jones, if Davis named a GM this afternoon, and gave him full authority, you'd be complaining about the choice five minutes later. If it took you that long.
Earlier, I mentioned that often the referee's fear of the home crowd causes them to throw flags accordingly.
Now, we all know that only Raider fans can become unruly. At least that's the opinion of the league and the media. Stephen Colbert will explain why Cleveland fans should not be considered violent.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
watch/mon-december-17-2001/
brown-fans-to-blame
AHHH Blanda, STFU.
Of course, it depends on who he hired and how it went down. The only way I accept Al's choice, if Al himself tells the world that he is STEPPING DOWN from operations. That he will hand over all responsibilities pertaining to Drafts, player development, cap and/or salary management, coaching hires and FA aquisitions to a QUALIFIED GM.
Once this happens, we can all have a big sigh and move on to a new era. Of course NOTHING is guaranteed in life so his hiring may not work out. I will STILL support it because this is the direction the RAIDERS need to move in order to stop the blood letting.
The method currently being used in Alameda is a PROVEN failure, to continue down this path is ridiculous. The league knows it and so do the fans who have a brain. All we are saying...give change a chance.
JONES
Blanda, you make it very hard to even take a sniff of your rotten apple branch. The refs don't fear being lynched by unruly fans. That is such a dumb comment. Security these days would never let a crowd lynch a ref. Society has progressed since the early 70's ya know? No longer are fans even trying to go on the field, unless a crazed drunk trying to get a ball from Farve....again Blanda, this is 2010 (couple of days) NOT 1972.
JONES
Um... Jones, (sigh) access that site I posted. The incident in question there happened in 2001. Eight years ago. You were born by then, weren't you?
Don't need to read it, so they threw their beer bottles at them.....ooooo...give some hazard pay, that ought to cover it.
72 was a hostile enviroment, fans were all over the field and the refs knew the fans had access to the field. Much different scenario....but I know, it's your "way" of having to argue over something else to avoid what is being said about Al Davis. This is a method used by those who try to deflect and minimize TRUTH, it's what you do Blanda..... you say you come on this site while you are at work, do you ever do any work? or is this your work?
JONES
And, Jones, Joe Kurkura disagrees with you. The bad officiating on Sunday wasn't Al Davis' fault. It was Tom Cable's.
"Numerous Browns told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that Raiders were 'beating on (running back) Jerome Harrison after he was down' and 'twisting (center) Alex Mack's hands and fingers.'
"The game officials sure were buying it. The Raiders were penalized 13 times for 126 yards, and two Raiders were ejected in separate incidents.
"That's what happens when your coach has been accused of assault three times."
Yeah, Jones. That's all I do is avoid Al Davis arguments. Also, when I'm here you say I'm avoiding work, and when I'm not you say I'm avoiding you.
You have got to be the single most disagreeable person I've ever dealt with.
Oh, so now the mediots are true? Here we go....Blanda is moving the walls again...it's his best "trick". Again, it is Al's fault because he hired Cable and he allows his team to be undisciplined. Wrong again Blunda.....your wall moving doesn't work when the guy knows you are moving the walls....GIVE IT UP.
JONES
You find me disagreeable....that's because your wall moving doesn't work on me...you like suckers who fall for your deceit and lies. Give up on me, Blanda, I'm way past your game.
JONES
And, uh, yeah... Partially empty glass beer bottles thrown some 25 or more yards at guys without helmets. Nope. No danger of injury there. No siree!
Jones, you're not capable of "game." You're just loud.
I'm LOUD? How can you be LOUD when writing on a blog site? You are so ridiculous...my "game" is wiping your "game" off the map....how does that feel?
HEY BLUNDA, yes I'm yelling, STFU, you are semi- retarded if not a full blown case. You make no sense and your defense of a losing formula is proof positive. No go back to your desk, sit down and twittle your thumbs, you can't screw that up, can you?
JONES
Gee, Jones, can you ever forgive me being a "name-caller." Fire off another one before mommy comes in and takes away your computer privileges.
Wow, so some drunks threw beer bottles, that is very close to a lynching, isn't it?
This is your "proof" that the refs are indeed in danger, thus their homer calls to satisfy the lynch mob. More ridiculous babble by the KING....keep going Blunda, soon you will be so embarrassed by your own ridiculous statements that not even YOU will be able to withstand your own stupidity.
I know, it's part of your "job" not to be embarrassed and just to continue on like it never happened......what a web you weave.
JONES
Classic Blunda, the ole "still living your Momma's basement" line. It's all you have left...HAHAHAHA, you lose, AGAIN.
JONES
It's the TRUTH.
Well, at least you admit that what I write/YELL is the truth...maybe there is hope for you yet, Blunda.
JONES
Give it up, fellas.
Officiating won't change the following positions that are still vacant on the Raiders:
General Manager
Director of Scouting
Director of Player Personnel
Offensive Coordinator
We have an 80-year owner who thinks he can handle the top three posts as well as all his owner duties.
We have a HC that thinks he can handle the latter in addition to his duties as HC (which normally would be less of a reach, unless you’ve watched the Raiders' offense this year).
So there are at least four critical positions in the Raiders' administrative and coaching hierarchy that remain void (with no incline they might get filled by qualified individuals). But we're more concerned about officiating. Yikes!
HEY NY, STFU. It's the road the blog has taken...WE ALL FREAKIN KNOW what the freakin problem is. Can we change the subject, or do we need your worthless permission first? I was telling YOU years back what you are parroting now. Don't make out like you are the one who made the playing field. IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT IS WRITTEN/YELLED, don't read it = SIMPLE.
JONES
in the denver game 2 weeks ago, 3 raider players recieved concusions.
were the donks head hunting ? don't know, but the officials weren't concerned enough to throw 13 flags at the donks.
but as soon as the raiders start the rough stuff, out come the little yellow flags.
guess the league is telling the raiders they should take their beatings, but not dish them out.
Good gravy.
I feel like I'm back in Junior High.
I suppose I just need to look for the posted Takes and leave the comment section alone. This name-calling crap is gettin' old.
JMHSO
---Jeff
Yeah, let's tone down the personalized bickering, profanity, etc. Help me keep this place different please.
Ark, stop being such a hypocrite you bonehead.
Yeah, let's not be passionate or call out posters who are purely ridiculous...nahhh, can't have that in this sensitive age.
This is football, you know swearing, kicking ass, arguing...you know MAN STUFF, remember?
No, just keep it real quiet and no bad words, someone might get offended and then we would have to shut it all down cause the sensitvity police will come and arrest you.
My goodness, what have Raider fans become? All this losing has made most of the fans pussies and tippy toeing around the truth.....NOT THIS AMIGO, you can take all your " stop it" "I'm telling on you" " you can't say that" and blow it out your ear. Man up boys, this is FREAKIN FOOTBALL and the FREAKIN RAIDERS...gets some bullochs and toughen up.
JONES
Anyone think this is going to get worse with the Ravens?
You suppose they didn't notice the Raiders falling apart after the shit started going down?
You suppose Ray Lewis noticed the new "one free punch to the face" Raider rule, where not only does he get to punch Raider players in the face, but it also gets the "punchee" thrown out of the game on top of it?
Next Sunday could be BEDLAM folks!
This is the NFL that the refs created!! Will there be any Raider players left on the field at the end of the game??
Give it up Blanda. Jones has got your number!! lol
Sarasota Raider
Jones - kickin' ass and takin' names.
Get a grip.
“HEY NY, STFU.” “I was telling YOU years back what you are parroting now.”
Yeah, up until about a year ago you were just another coward who wouldn’t sign a name to his tourette-riddled posts. At least you’ve resorted to acronyms to scream your profanity. I guess we should all be thanking you for that, right?
Oh NY NY...sorry bud, it's been longer than a year 2 years 3 years, you can go back and check if you like.....and before that, my posts were done in a the same manner as now, except I used no capitol letters back then.
Go look NY, you are riding the same train as Blanda = who cares about the truth, right? Just put out false statements and see what happens huh.
NY, you are FALSE, you are a parrot. I knew when Norv Turner was hired, that Al had slipped back into his "vision" of a team. I was posting it and all I got back from COWARDS like you, were insults, put downs and every other discredit routine in the book. So spare me your garbage and realize who the first poster on here was, in telling it as it was and has turned out. Stop riding my coat-tails NY. Get your OWN gig, this one has already been set....
JONES
Jones, you have accomplished the remarkable feat of alienating just about everyone. Please don't take that as a compliment. I appreciate what you bring to the table, but why such venom?
Jones -
I barely read your posts now, what makes you think I want to go back and read them from two years ago?
But keep up the good work. Otherwise, how else will I know what to post?
LOL, oh no, everyone hates me...boo hooo. Couldn't careless, not here to make friends, here to post what is right, to defend the truth from deceit makers and story tellers.
Take, it's nothing new, been that way since day 1. If I'm going along with the "crew", then something will be very wrong.
Thing is, no one can handle just straight out truth, especially on this site..... you have to write nicely so everyone will think you are a great guy. PFFFFTTT...never been that way.
The crew loves to hate Jones, just the way it is...who cares, I'm going to write what I do and if ya don't like it....fogat about it.
JONES
You are welcome NY...got an idea...how bout you never read my posts, deal? Then you can go on pretending like you sniffed it out a long time ago. Go write to the rest of the crew and leave me be, understand tommy?
JONES
Blaming the loss to the Browns on the officials rings hollow and is a complete insult to the game of football.
From reading all of the comments from Raider players including leaders like Seymour and Ellis, it is clear that yes, there were a few questionable calls.
Guess what, there will be subjective, questionable calls in every single game that we will NEVER know what happened, what a ref saw, or a player said.
If a player makes contact with a ref, says FU to ref, or retaliates to an opponent's action, there is about a 99% chance of a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct.
The bottom line is that the Raider players need to execute their assignments better from play to play, overcome questionable calls, and adapt to the way the refs are calling the game.
The HC needs to yank certain players off the field, call a TO, and refocus the squad to the task at hand ... or is everyone losing focus to what the task at hand is ... yup, win the game.
If a player lacks the discipline and intestinal fortitude, it is nothing shy of selfish and detrimental behavior to the team's goal.
Real leadership and toughness when facing adversity is earned by actions and accountability not whining and bellyaching about a few bad calls.
The refs were gambling on the game. That's how I see it.
The Raiders lost the game due to their own ineptitude. That's how I see it.
The refs still need to be investigated for creating a WWF atmosphere instead of an NFL game. They certainly did the Raiders no favors, and contributed to the loss.
That's my take. Folks need to quit excusing and enabling the officiating, period. You're cosigning delinquent behavior, and as such are accessories to the crime.
---Jeff
Look what that Pete Rozelle wise crack started. Why is almost everyone afraid to admit that year after year the RAIDERS are ALWAYS SCREWED by the NFL and the frickon refs. IT DOESN'T TAKE A BRAIN SURGEON TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. To actually believe there's no bias toward the Raiders is totally ridiculous.
Wow, you guys have been busy since I shut down last night. I see Jonesy is at his usual name calling, personal insult hurling best. Kind of reminds me of the eight year old bully wantabe on the playground during recess. Could be pathological.
Anyway, this is the last I will say about the officiating. Calico, we did not lose the game because of officiating. But, they didn’t help the situation with the one sidedness of their calls.
Having said that, here’s the bottom line for me. In the last 15 years or so, this team has gone to extraordinary measures to cut back on the number of penalties. They bring in officials every summer, go over all the blocking techniques they teach, the formations they run, etc.
They have brought in retired refs to help review game film. They have changed coaches, changed personnel and worked on refining coverage and blocking techniques. I even remember one season they had to change blocking techniques in the middle of the season because a block that was legal when the officials visited camp was suddenly illegal. Problem is it became illegal at a very critical point in the game and stifled and important drive. For all that time the only real constant is the officials on the field. Many of them have been officiating for well over 15 years. Problem is they are a variable constant (there’s one for you math majors and more on that later).
Arkansas brings up a very valid point. If you look at the replay, Frye was out of it before he hit the ground. He took a helmet to the chin, but no flag. Last time I heard anything that was a personal foul.
Fact, through 11 games we were amongst the best in the league in fewest calls and lowest penalty yardage. Fact, we started playing better beginning with the Stripped Kitten game, this was game 10. Fact, in game 12 the refs go berserk and have continued so. Aside from the QB change the only other change was the officiating crews (There’s your variable constant).
It’s not every official or every crew. But, for the integrity of the game the league needs to address the inconsistencies and biases perceived or real. The league will call out and fine a player for conduct during a game in a effort to make the product better. Do the same for officials if they are making crap calls on plays they can’t see.
Now, on another subject. Cable has placed much of the offensive problems on Russell. Sorry Tom, that may be true, but you are the one who kept starting him when he should have been benched by at least game 5. One disclaimer is I need a little more context to be certain but on the surface that’s my reaction to the statement.
H
We lost due to bad coaching in my opinion.But in a sport of a million replay angles I have still not seen the Routt, Stewart, or Seymour incidents.Strange..
RT, hope christmas went well and all the best for 2010 from Across The Pond.
H said "Anyway, this is the last I will say about the officiating"
I will hold your feet to the fire on the above statement, H.
Your "theory" about the refs making bad calls as soon as the Raiders started to play better in the latter part of the season is ridiculous. It has ZERO merit and is getting annoying to hear. You can say "FACT" "FACT
" FACT" until you are blue in the face but it is irrelevant, erroneous, and unsubstantiated.
Al Davis, by his own admission, does not believe in discipline. There's your reason for the large number of penalties over the years. I can't believe that grown men are whining about a situation that starts with Al Davis, not the refs. Sad.
Arkansas (aka 'the "birther') with the ongoing conspiracy theories. Who woulda thunk it?
On one hand you have the Raiders' coaches and players stating they need to better maintain their composure; while on the other hand you have the Browns' players complaining the Raiders were beating on their RB and twisting hands and fingers at the bottom of the pile... a pretty bizarre complaint for any team to make, particularly one coming off a win.
And you wonder why the officiating might have been a little overzealous?
Stewart admitted he touched an official in a defensive manner. You can't do that, period. The official flagged it, as was his right to do so.
Seymour was in the middle of the scuffle that resulted in offsetting penalties, then continued to argue with the official. He admitted as much. Up to that point, the officials were content to allow the penalties to offset. Players have to know when to back off.
I didn't see or read anything specific about Routt's penalty, but I did see Routt shove Anderson after the scuffle a few plays earlier (not suggesting these are related).
Granted, the call on Miller was bad, but it appeared he did motion with his hands as if to spike the ball near the head of a Brown player. The ball slipped weakly to the ground, making it a ridiculous (judgement) call.
I've seen worse calls (and non-calls) in other games through the course of the year.
I buy the notion that the officiating is inconsistent, and should be addressed, but I don't believe the refs had it out for the Raiders vs Browns.
Calico,
I do hold open the option for next year. For now I've said my piece for this season on the subject, so you may have the last word. It was getting boring anyway.
One man's ridiculous is another man's black helicopter. Just ask Oliver Stone.
H
The only people blaming the refs for the loss are those who chronically make excuses for Al's handling of the team, aka Gary, Ark and Blanda. I see inconsistent and poor officiating in just about every game. The Raiders are penalized often because they play a unorganized, simplistic and undisciplined style of football.
H, I read this group because the majority of people here don't make excuses for Al's poor handling of the team AND because the majority here recognize that this has been a problem since the mid-80's, not just the last 6 or 7 years. I also like that this group doesn't bow down to bullying from Al's most loyal followers: they claim a real Raider fan must submit to Al Davis, which is bullshit.
Only when Al brought in a progressive GM and HC did we actually play well. And Al couldn't handle that credit going to someone other than himself, so we've been back a square one for a while now. There's only ONE consistent factor here, that factor is Al, not the refs, not who the QB is or isn't and not even the pathetic HC hires over the years. No it's the MAN responsible for those decisions and the team philosophy: Al believes players should have more power than the HC; Al believes that discipline is overrated; Al believes that he can hire HC's on a whim, without barely knowing their background; Al believes in speed over intangibles and intelligence; Al believes that he can be an owner, scout, coach and GM rolled into one, even though the game has advanced far beyond his comprehension and even though he wastes his time with petty lawsuits that are more costly than what he gains from it.
I mean, WAKE UP Al jockers!!!! What's the matter with you people? All you have is straw man arguments.
Ahhh, I feel better now. Time for my morning joe. My New Years wish? A friggin' GM and a HC, who at the very least, has won more games than lost during his coaching career. Wishful thinking? Probably. But Al got it through is thick head for a small amount of time within the last decade; so, I'm holding out hope. It may take another season of losing for him and Al's yes-men to get a clue, but it would be worth it.
The 'ref whiners' are actually combining ridiculous with black helicopters.
The notion that Cable might have drawn a line in the sand wrt to Russell is probably enough to get him fired.
http://raiderbeat.com/?p=6600
So next year it might be Fassel as HC and a whole new set of downs for Russell (and Heyward-Bey). That should be enough to turn any Raider fan's stomach.
ok - i have been bashing janikowski since day 1. but i have to admit, the fact that he is NOT in the pro bowl is a crime.
http://tfdssports.com/2009-articles/december/janikowski-shut-out-of-rightful-pro-bowl-nod.html
Onadonadon,
“they claim a real Raider fan must submit to Al Davis, which is bullshit.”
Show me the quote where any of us have made such a statement. Until such time I say you are claiming that the only true Raider Fan is the one who thinks Al Davis is responsible for everything to include Global Warming and the Kennedy Assassination. That’s no more idiotic than your statement.
“And Al couldn't handle that credit going to someone other than himself,”
What insight do you have that we don’t? Al Davis called Gruden and asked him if he wanted to stay or go. It was in all the papers, you must have just missed it. Al Davis stated it as that and Gruden has backed him up.
Why do you follow a team where you harbor so much hatred and vitriol for the owner? You seem to really hate people who disagree with you. I believe this is a site for the free exchange of opinions and ideas. You seem to only want opinions here that agree with yours.
H
New take is up!
H said, "I do hold open the option for next year"
very clever H. You mean you can wait all of 2 more whole days to resist babbling on about ref conspiracies?
Post a Comment
<< Home