A Time for Sacrifice
The following is a Guest Take by Raider Nate 75:
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 playcalling 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 Browns.
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 Patriots 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 two 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 it's 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."
Thank you, Raider Nate 75!
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 playcalling 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 Browns.
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 Patriots 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 two 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 it's 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."
Thank you, Raider Nate 75!
posted by Raider Take at 7:52 AM
164 Comments:
Well said, sadly I don't see this happening. Al has shown over the years that he would prefer to dig in his heels and double down, rather than admit he is wrong and change course. The only accountability in the nation is for head coaches.
Roy
Calico,
Yeah, pretty much. Each new season brings it's own vagries which must be commented on. Who knows, maybe the league will do more than lip service this off season.
Maybe Al will finally bring in a GM to work with.
Both of those need to happen. Chances of either one happening are fairly slim.
Besides, ref bashing is an old and time honored tradition in sports. As is Al bashing, and I don't see that ending anytime soon either.
H
Nate,
Good balanced post. I would say "steping aside" rather than "steping out".
Just sounds a little more like "get the proper help" as opposed to "go away." Just an inteperation.
H
Well done, Nate. Unfortunately, it will probably fall on def ears in Alameda, but very eloquently put, nonetheless.
Despite my occasional rants, I still carry much respect for Al Davis and what he has meant to the Raiders and their fans; but the frustration is mounting with every passing year of failure. I believe Davis is at a point of critically damaging his legacy. To do what you and many of us suggest would be an incredibly bold move on his part, and rejuvenate what’s left of the Davis, err, Raider mystique.
Godspeed.
NY,
"I believe Davis is at a point of critically damaging his legacy.?"
you're implying that he is just now damaging his legacy. sorry but that happened YEARS ago! he f'd up what's left of his legacy starting when he picked up his ball and moved to LA. it was all downhill from there!
So, are we supposed to stop complaining about the refs now? Seems like Nates post has a lot to do with Al vs Refs....I don't like the point of how the Raiders complained about the Snow Job, thus the reason for losing the Game. Like I wrote earlier, if you have ever played sports and for some reason the ref/s have it in for you, it makes it very hard to keep your composure. Professional or not, when you have worked all your life for something and some prick with a flag is screwing with your hard work.....
The history of the Raiders vs the Refs goes way back. Any Raider fan or PLAYER will tell you this is a fact. Go ahead and pull the "if you believe in one conspiracy, you believe them all" line. So much broad brush stroking, labeling, that shit is for those who have a closed mind. Anyone with an open mind is open to "ANYTHING is possible". When you close your mind and say "the majority thinks this way, so it must be this way" that is very dangerous. You can see how the masses can be fooled with this type of thinking.
I don't think anyone is blaming the refs for defeats, it's more of a piling on effect. The Raiders are behind the 8 ball before the even get on the field at game time. They are run like a tier II college team, the coaching is always lacking, they are put in archaic schemes, then they have to contend with the refs. It's got to be tough. I know I would lose my cool, just like I do with the "crew". Please don't hate me, I'm only here for the GOOD of the Raiders, nothing personal, just don't piss me off....lol.
JONES
Bingo Scorpio, BINGO.
JONES
NYRaider,
Well said also. In spite of my being accused of drinking the spiked kool-aid with a blindfold on, I too feel Al Davis needs someone in a GM type capacity.
I use that wording because he won't have that title.
I agree with Nate in that it is not a matter of the game passing him by. My reasoning is he is not currently capable of physically doing the job.
Hell, I was all excited with the rumor someone was to come on board last winter.
Madden says he will. We shall see.
On Cable drawing a line in the sand. He basically stated what I said last August. Russell only needed steady though unspectacular imporvement for this team to succeed. Instead, he went backwards.
He may also be saying, "I tried it your way, let's try it my way and see what happens."
In many ways I would like to see Cable back. The players have shown they will play hard for him,and some continuity would be nice.
The defense is also improved over last year so I would bring Marshall back for another go.
Under that scenario any new GM would have to be willing to work with Cable for at least one season.
Gradkowski wants to come back. He will be a restricted free agent. Losman only has a standard one year contract, but he could easily be signed for the league minimum.
This team, in my opinion, has the talent to win in this league. And, while Cable was espousning something I stated, he still waited to long to implement a change in this case.
If the change in game 10 had such an impact on the team, imagine what it would have done for the team if it had happened in game 5 or 6.
Don't wait so long next time Tom.
Jones,
I'm through complaining about them for this year. Got it out of my system. You may continue at flank speed if you wish.
Scorpio,
I've never lived in California. I've always been a fan-from-afar so that move had little impact on me even though I wish he had stayed in Oakland.
In the end, winning will be the ultimate legacy. The thing with sports is it is, and always has been, a "what have you done for me lately" enterprise.
H
Calico:
Not to belabor the point, but you seem to be of the belief that how a game is called by the officiating crew has no baring on who wins. If that's the case, why would the league make it against the rules for the officials to gamble on the games? After all, gambling is perfectly legal.
However, if I'm not understanding you, and you do acknowledge that officiating definitely determines the outcome, then shouldn't we be demanding that the league clean up its act? And I'd suggest that we'd have much more success with that than encouraging Al to abandon his team.
How is asking Al Davis to do the very same things he's always done when he won (hire a qualified head coach and seek the help of a qualified GM) the same as asking him to "abandon" his team?
How is asking him to repeat what has worked, and to stop what clearly hasn't worked, an unreasonable request?
Why is asking for change after the most repetitive losing run in NFL history a bad thing?
Why do some folks have such a low opinion of Al Davis that they think he cannot change?
Why do some folks believe that the fans have no say in the matter, when in fact they are saying it repeatedly with 20k empty seats?
Why do some people fear change at the very moment when it is most needed?
Why do people answer questions with questions?
/snark
---Jeff
Take,
That is why I prefer the term "stepping aside". To me that is making room for the new guy.
A matter of semantics I guess; however, it is more in line with how I feel about the guy.
Last year there was strong indication it was going to happen. This year nary a peep. Maybe that's a positive sign that something is in the works.
In April my first grandchild will be born. I want him to be able to sit safely next to me on the sofa, in the greatest country in the world watching the Raiders kick ass.
When I regale him of the glory days when I walked 10 miles to school each day, in the snow, and speak of Snake, Plunk, Otto, Lester et al, I want him to be building some of the same type memories.
Ok, now that I've gone all maudlin on everyone, I think I go get a cup of caffeine.
H
Answers, Take...
How is asking Al Davis to do the very same things he's always done when he won (hire a qualified head coach and seek the help of a qualified GM) the same as asking him to "abandon" his team?
[It's not. But there are still a number of folks here who DO advocate that.]
How is asking him to repeat what has worked, and to stop what clearly hasn't worked, an unreasonable request?
[It's certainly not an unreasonable request. What is unreasonable is demanding that Al do what you want to do, when he doesn't want to, or is not yet prepared to make the change.]
Why is asking for change after the most repetitive losing run in NFL history a bad thing?
[That's never a bad thing, and nobody ever said that it was. So why the question, unless you're looking to create a straw man argument?]
Why do some folks have such a low opinion of Al Davis that they think he cannot change?
[The fact is that history shows Al Davis changes a lot. His own statement is, "I'd rather be right than consistent."]
Why do some folks believe that the fans have no say in the matter, when in fact they are saying it repeatedly with 20k empty seats?
[I'm saying that's exactly the recourse that fans have. And it's the ONLY recourse. In other words, other than that, you have no say in the matter.]
Why do some people fear change at the very moment when it is most needed?
[Who fears change? But I think there are legitimate differences into what changes are needed. Why is disagreement in the changes you want viewed as "fear of change?"]
Now answer this question. In view of bad officiating that has gone on since back in the '70s (and has kept the Raiders out of THREE SBs - the only team to be so afflicted), why is it only conspiracy theorists who believe that it's finally time for the NFL to clean up its act?
H -
"Last year there was strong indication it was going to happen. This year nary a peep. Maybe that's a positive sign that something is in the works."
I think just the opposite. After his promise of help last year, Davis quickly abandoned that and took a “larger” role himself. Now, when other teams are interviewing and hiring GMs and coaches, there's no sign that Davis will act on his earlier promise.
Part of the Raiders’ problem has always been inaction.
Blanda, I find it odd that someone who says I have no right to request things that are beyond my control is demanding things from the NFL that are beyond his control.
In general, those were very weak answers to my questions.
Everyone disagrees with me, until I ask them where they disagree with me.
Having their cake, and eating it, too.
Regarding the officals, I just don't care that much right now, that's all. Talk about something that's out of my control. The Raiders organization reads this blog, but I doubt the NFL does.
The officiating will be moot in four days, because we won't be playing in the postseason again. What won't be moot in four days is our coaching position, our GM position and our draft preparation.
If the officials made up the Routt infraction, then the Raiders should file an official protest (and instruct their coach to stand up for his team when the bad calls are being made).
In fact, if it's made up, they should make a record of the alleged obvious bias and sue the league. That will get it out on the table, and if the officials try to retaliate, it will be obvious.
I just can't give equal billing to the officials on my list of concerns.
That doesn't mean I excuse or like the officiating. It means I have different priorities when it comes to curing what truly ails us.
Take, perhaps I misspoke. You certainly have the right to make ANY demands you want. You can demand that we no longer call green green, but blue instead. And you'll have just about as much success achieving it.
And you know full well why Cable doesn't stand up for his team publicly. Because he'll get fined. And the officials WILL retaliate. The NFL has the gag order out to the owners, players and coaches. It's the fans that they don't control.
And you're wrong about influence. Davis has proven over his entire life that he'll do what he wants. But all advertising and marketing prospects are run through the NFl. Fans have a far greater influence over the NFL than they do over Al Davis. That's why the gag order. It minimizes the possibility that the fans will become sufficiently enraged to act or make demands of the NFL.
Take says... "In fact, if it's made up, they should make a record of the alleged obvious bias and sue the league. That will get it out on the table, and if the officials try to retaliate, it will be obvious".
SUE THE LEAGUE? What in the hell do you think caused the bias we already see? GEEZ, it is OBVIOUS that the refs call the Raiders differently, how many calls in this year alone?
The Murphy TD was a PRIME example. You saw it all year with other touchdowns, even on the same day as Murph's. How many times did Moss get called for pushing off? Never on Minnesota and never on N.E, every push as a Raider = YELLOW FLAG. Come on, denying it is ridiculous. Saying that we shouldn't be talking about it because there are other concerns...sounds more like, " don't want to think about it, might slant my view of the league".
Why do people always have trouble with the TRUTH? Does it break down your programming or what? I don't get it.
JONES
Who says I'm denying it? It's just not at the top of my list of concerns right now. We have bigger fish to fry.
If, Jones, as you and Blanda say, the Raiders can't sue and really can't say or do anything anything about the officials, why are we still talking about it? The Raiders CAN hire a GM.
Blanda tells me it's useless for me to share what I believe the Raiders should do to turn things around, then would have me believe that making demands of Roger Goodell and the officials on a Raiders blog will be effective.
I am Alice, and this is Wonderland.
I agree H. Stepping aside is what should've been said, and reflects the change I would like to see.
So, the reason I used "stepping out" because he is debating within himself as to when he should hand over the team to his son; who doesn't want control of football operations. My bet is when he finds someone (other than himself) to handle everyday football operations (a viable GM); he will "step out" of the picture completely. So I used that phrase "stepping out" because part of the change I think that needs to happen is finding a viable GM. I think the search for a GM is the process of him stepping out completely. So I stand by what I said in that.
Jones said, "I don't like the point of how the Raiders complained about the Snow Job, thus the reason for losing the Game."
I agree Jones, I don't like that point either, but when you read quotes from the Raiders (even to this day) about that game; they (the players/coaches/owner) blame that loss on that call reversal. But the point I was trying to make was the bad calls against the Raiders in the history of the NFL seem to stand out more than any other team, because the Raiders never seem to let them die. When a bad call is made against them in any game; it seems like they pull out the overhead projector, and go down the list of bad calls against them in their history; and use the conspiracy card. I'm tired of that. Move on! I would say 9 times out of 10, they still had to make plays after a bad call.
I have played sports, and it is difficult when it seems that the refs are out to get you; but that is the time you just bury your head and let your game speak for itself; and then you file a formal complaint with the league.
As far as refs are concerned, I used to umpire Little League (never again will I do it); and I know from experience that refs get tired of complaints as well. I called the game like I saw it, and I never let my emotion determine my call. I can't say that all refs/umpires do this (especially in the college/pro level where gambling can be a factor). But that is the human element of refereeing; right or wrong.
Now I will say the Raiders seem to be a team that complains a lot; justified or not is not the issue. I'm not saying never complain; but I am saying don't let it take over your game. Complain properly and respectfully; let the Head Coach be the voice that the refs hear because that is what he's there for.
You may indeed be Alice, but this is not Wonderland. Again, you're making the straw man argument that somebody is telling you that you shouldn't be making any suggestions regarding Raider changes. The ONLY assertion I've made is that DEMANDS won't get you anywhere. You CAN refuse to buy a ticket but, ultimately, it will be Al Davis who will decide what it takes to bring you back - whether or not it actually does. And I'd suggest that simply winning will bring you back, whether or not the changes you're DEMANDING are made.
However, fans have a far greater influence over the NFL other than writing on Goodell's blog. As I said, all marketing goes through the NFL, not the individual teams. If as many fans (who didn't all happen to be Raider fans) complained loudly enough, something would have to be done about the officiating.
You are starting to talk nonsense.
Suggestions, demands, takes, you're just parsing words now. This is called Raider Take, and these are my takes.
If the Raiders don't hire a competent GM and a strong head coach, and if they don't stop running with scissors in the draft, the will NOT win with any regularity. They have proven it for seven straight years.
Hence my suggestions, requests, demands, takes, whatever you want to call them.
Again, you won't say you disagree with the substance of my suggestions, demands, takes, whatever you call them...you just don't like me expressing them.
Well, too bad. This is Raider TAKE.
I'm calling it now.
Al will stick with Cable, and Al will remain the GM. However, Al will give Cable much more leeway. He wasn't going to let a young punk cause him to miss out on the giant arm, but hopefully realizes the arm does no good without a head.
So, Cable stays, Al opens his eyes and works WITH the coach on player selection, and stays out of the way of all other team operations (i.e., who plays, what plays are called, etc.).
We get a vet QB (is it Lossman? Grad? Someone else? Who knows), another vet O-lineman, and some rookies (o-line, linebaker, d-line). And we finally get back to the playoffs next year.
Cable will still call the plays. He learned some things his rookie playcalling year (i.e., don't always call the play based on what the D is giving you, because the D might be playing you by showing you something other than what they are really running).
The Raiders are back in 2010, and Al did it his way.
-moshbucket
PS: Spare the flames. I know it's not likely (well, it's scary likely, just not the outcome).
But if it DOES pan out, whatca gonna do wit da billboard?
That's my take, and I'm stickin' to it.
PR, check in dude! Startin' to worry about ya. And miss the eclectic musings.
-moshbucket
this interview with John Madden appeared in the sunday, dec. 27th new york post.
on Al Davis,
Q: Should Al Davis hire a football czar ?
Madden: I think he knows that he should. When he had Bruce Allen, & Jon Gruden, that was a pretty good team.
on NFL officials,
Q: Should league hire full time officials ?
Madden: I think we have to work towards that. I thought that when I was coaching, you go one position(Ref, or side judge, etc.) at a time. I think we have to get younger, & faster.
you can check out the complete interview online. but these were the main topics that concern Raider fans.
Congrats to Lechler and Asomugha. It must be tough to get the recognition you deserve while playing for a team with the worst record over the last seven years.
Not to take anything away from Lechler, but never has a punter been given so much opportunity to let it fly.
Of course there's a difference of opinion here on who he should thank for that.
Interesting, Take. You have no trouble stating your suggestions, requests, demands, takes, but it seems impossible for you to actually read mine before responding to them.
I have read them, and responded cogently to them.
Agree with all points except Cable costing us 4-5 games. No question his inability to use Bush and McFadden properly has been mind boggling, maybe even grounds for termination, but Russell had a lot to do with us losing. Yeah, it was still pretty close at half of the Redskins game, then as I recall, Grads got hurt and Russell came in and everyone in silver and black quit.
Good job Nate!
You should consider (a) your own blog (b) more guest takes on RT (c) a guest take on SBF. Your opinions raises the level of discourse on our beloved Raiders.
In response to BR's comment of,
"Not to belabor the point, but you seem to be of the belief that how a game is called by the officiating crew has no baring on who wins."
No, that isn't my overall view. My view is fairly simple.
(1) The refs, for the most part, do a good job. The nature of officiating an NFL game creates certain instances where refs make subjective, snap decisions in a fast, violent sport.
(2) The refs do make bad calls in every game on Sunday. We (Raider fans) just so happen to focus on our games, our injustices, our frustration with blown calls.
(3) There have been some dubious, game altering calls that have gone against the Raiders over the years but this is limited to just a handful of games.
Some of the more memorable games, due to the significance of the game (ie. Lytle fumble, immaculate reception), were prior to coaches challenges and instant replay.
(4) The officiating can impact the final score and result for the Raiders. The more important question to ask, knowing full well that there will be bad calls every game, is what did the Raiders do AFTER the bad call? Did the team respond by fighting through the adversity or did they use the call as a springboard to fold up their tent and implode.
As it relates to the Browns game, the Raiders were out-played, out-coached, and out-gameplanned. If I had to nail down the primary reasons for the "L" it would be:
(1) Cable's playcalling and useage of personnel
(2) 3 costly INTs by Frye
(3) lack of focus and discipline that was the main cause for the penalites.
IMO, many Raider fans are using a few bad calls as a crutch. In the big picture, the officiating of Raider games over the past 7 years has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with piss poor results. The Raiders can not control a ref with bias or one that makes a mistake but they can control how they react to it.
The good teams overcome and adjust and find ways to win in spite of a few bad calls ... just like we did from 1970-1984. If and when we get our sh*t together, the leadership will take lemons and make lemonade.
Why do we talk about any of this shit? To try and find truth? You have as much chance of the refs changing as you do the Owner, what's the freakin difference?
I hope the only range of topics ISN'T just get rid of Al...there is more to football,NO?
JONES
Go ahead and talk about the officiating, just don't expect me to make it the story of a game in which we got taken to the woodshed in all phases by the Browns.
The officiating wasn't the main course of that game. It was the appetizer. I will expend my mental energy accordingly.
By waking up the morning after that game and making the officiating the top story, some folks are just enabling the excuse-making that Greg Ellis, bless him, is trying to eradicate.
Ellis is fighting a losing battle, apparently (here at Raider Take and in the locker room). He's been trying to wake everyone up since the preseason, when he called his teammates out for partying instead of preparing.
If the Raiders are thinking as much about the officiating as you guys are, then they are already toast this Sunday.
Don't tell me that the Raiders have suddenly been muted into choir boy silence by the all-powerful NFL. One of our executives almost assaulted a ref after a blow call at a Chiefs game three years ago. Gruden used to get red hot and go all Chucky on the refs if they were screwing us.
But now Blanda is telling me that Tom Cable has to just politely nod his head on the sideline as his team is allegedly getting screwed?
Weak, weak, weak.
Be like Greg Ellis.
Have watched with many games with nonRaider fans who would look at me and say " Do the refs screw you like this all the time?". I would just tell them, well only since about 1968- 69.
The only time, so it seems, that the refs start calling the Raiders equally, will be when Al steps down. This is all very relevent in whether Al should step down. Wipe the slate clean with the league, or would that be selling Raiders' soul to the corporates?
Yes there is a bias from the refs, yes the league is not happy, for whatever reason, with the Raiders.
It is just another reason to point to, another reason for the ole man to step down. Al can still own the team, he can keep his spot in the box. Just give FOOTBALL authority to a QUALIFIED individual who can make a TEAM that is qualified to run the organization.
When will the new era begin? How much longer can the league allow it before they pressure Al to step down. Is part of that pressure the refs? How else could they put pressure on Al under the owners constitution? One day, the truth will come out.
JONES
Take if you aren't willing to listen to other fan's ideas or fustrations just shut this frickon blog down. Your propaganda is also getting old. We all know that as long as Al is still around nothing will ever change in Alameda, so you also need to stop your whining.
Well, if you are just focussed on the Clev. game, a game that was just another typical Raider snore fest...maybe there really isn't much else to write about? Same ole same ole... refs seem like a hot topic, why not just ride it out?
I don't speak for Blanda...I advocate a HC who rides the refs, they need to be ridden. The refs in the Pro game, take a ton of abuse, I find it hard to believe that the refs would throw flags for phantom calls for being yelled at.
I'm telling ya, the league manipulates the refs to call the Raiders close, it's always been that way. I have witnessed it for decades, it is possible, it has and continues to happen.
JONES
WHY CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!
I am listening, and I am responding. That's what it's all about.
Calico:
Since you seem to think that you know everything please tell me when was the last time the opposing team got screwed from a call in favor of the Raiders that ment anything in a game.
Also why did Coach Cable had to throw a red flag to review "an interception in the endzone" when everybody and their blind grandmother saw on tv the defender had the right foot out of bounds and both referees had perfect angle on the play?
Everything that has to do with the Raiders at this point is totally in CHAOS. We all need to vent out all of our frustrations, no matter what they are, and respect them. We are all just Raiders fans with one thing in common. WE ALL WAN'T A WINNER BOTTOMLINE!!
Calico every bad call always goes against the Raiders. How can you say that for the most part, the refs do a good job. We(you and me) must be watching different Raider games. I could never ever make such a statement.
Anonymous aka "my balls are too small to sign my name to this dribble":
I can't recall a significant game (playoffs or playoff qualifiying game) where the Raiders had the good fortune of a blown call against them. I personally can only think of 3 significant blown calls against the Raiders in 50 years of history.
1. Lytle fumble in AFC Conference Championship game. This was before coaches challenges/replay and to the naked eye was tough to see if/when Lytle fumbled.
2. The "immaculate reception" AFC Championship game where it was very difficult in real time to discern whether the ball richoched off of Fuqua or Tatum. This was also before coaches challenges/replays.
3. The "Tuck Rule" divisional playoff game vs. NE where the ref made an intepretation of a 400 page rule book with ambigious language.
Yes, all 3 of these sting. Can you name others of significance?
Why Cable had to resort to throwing the red flag on the INT? Who FN cares? I watched the game. I saw it was a close play. The ref got it wrong and it was corrected. Let me repeat for the 1000 time ... the refs did NOT cause the Raiders to lose to the Browns. Your crying about an insignificant play that had no bearing on the final result. This type of play happens in just about every game played across the US.
Further, you want to cry about things that happened 9, 30, and 35 years ago? How about crying about the fact that we keep bungling our draft choices, free agent acquisitions, coaching hires, lack of vision, GM vacancy, 7 straight double digit losses, and a completely rudderless franchise instead of 3 plays over the last 50 years?
All the spilt milk about the refs during a 5-10 season is pathetic and unbecoming. When we get to the stage of becoming a playoff caliber team, I will be 1st in line to holler about a blown call that alters a significant game. In the meantime, is doesen't reach my top 10 of priorities and concerns. Deal with marble balls.
Anon #2 aka the same yahoo or another punk who can't sign his name:
Go ahead and cite all of the bad calls that have gone against us this season that altered the game. Then explain how this 1 play dictated what the Raiders did immediately following. Beyond the questionable Murphy call in week 1, you will be very hard pressed to name any calls that altered ANY game this year.
I am not nieve to believe that there weren't some bads calls in every game. But I'm also not foolish, like you, to think that it altered the game's outcome.
We have 5 blowout losses. Don't even try mentioning a "blown" call in ANY of these games.
We have 5 wins. You can't say it altered ANY of these games.
You've got the Cleveland game which I have covered ad nauseum.
You've got the opener which I have acknowledged a potentially game altering blown call on the Murphy play.
You've down to 3 games to pick from where the score was "relatively" close. Go ahead Marble Balls ... give me the plays, context, and how the "blown" call altered the final outcome. __ CRICKETS ___
Nate,
Based on your previous wording I knew what you meant. However, before you got in someone’s crosshairs I wanted to get that out. Some folks will only read the first and last sentence and infer the rest. They are too lazy to actually read what people are actually saying.
“when you read quotes from the Raiders (even to this day) about that game; they (the players/coaches/owner) blame that loss on that call reversal.”
Monday night, last week I think it was, Walt Coleman went under the hood came out and made a ruling. To which John Gruden said, “Well, Walt Coleman got one right.” I leave it to you to interpret how he thinks. (Calico, that’s not ref bashing, it’s a Gruden anecdote).
Moshbucket,
If it happens you will need to change your handle to Kreskinbucket.
NYRaider,
“Of course there's a difference of opinion here on who he should thank for that.”
Jamarcus Russell, no if’s and’s or but’s.
Calico,
“3 costly INTs by Frye” I stated as much in my tirade. And, everything I stated as “fact” is, in fact, fact. I can provide the source if you like. (Not ref bashing, just a willingness to provide the data I used).
H
Anonymous said:
"Agree with all points except Cable costing us 4-5 games. No question his inability to use Bush and McFadden properly has been mind boggling, maybe even grounds for termination, but Russell had a lot to do with us losing. Yeah, it was still pretty close at half of the Redskins game, then as I recall, Grads got hurt and Russell came in and everyone in silver and black quit."
This has to do with playcalling as well. When Grads got hurt, and Russell came in, why didn't we continue to pound the ball and control the clock? It had to do with the playcalling; and yes, Russell's play making inability blew up. So why not call plays according to the strength of your team? Right now, Russell is not the only issue of our passing game; the receivers are just as much to blame.
Bottom line, for 7 years the Raiders have failed to offensively play to it's strength; and that is running the ball and running a controlled passing game. Instead they want to go for the Home Run everytime out, and strike out instead. There are other ways to put points on the board. Control the clock, wear the defense out with hard running, gas the CBs and Safeties with quick slants, outs, and a TE skinny. Those are the times that it opens up the field for one or two long passes in a half. Most likely you are only going to get that many in a game; so make it count.
I know a lot of people would disagree with me, but I say give Russell one more year. Cable had help with play calling this year (Ted Tollner "Passing Coordinator"), but he doesn't set up the passing game. He wants to pass-pass-pass-pass-pass-run-pass.... Play calling 101, you set up plays with the plays ran before. It is systematic. In order to go long, you just don't go long; you cause the safeties and linebackers to sneak up on the line of scrimmage by running the ball, screens, quick passing routes, and play action passing. Then once you catch them creaping up; you burn them with a skinny post, up-n-out, or just a route down the line. Then once you catch them creaping up; you burn them with a skinny post, up-n-out, or just a route down the line.
So as much as most fans complain about JaMarcus, Cable's playcalling inability combined with JaMarcus' work ethic (or lack thereof) doesn't put JaMarcus in a position to succeed.
I will answer your next question while you read this, "So why does Frye and Gradkowski seem to do okay?" They have been setting up the plays better with the running game; and Gradkowski and Frye have been doing a better job at lining up the offense than JaMarcus. It is give and take on both ends here. I think Cable needs to give up the play calling duties until he can learn how to do it properly; and we need to find a QB who is going to put in the effort to get the job done. This invokes the whole point of my take, change starts with leadership.
Correction to the statement:
"I say give Russell one more year."
It should read, I say give Russell one more year to learn before he gets another shot at QB.
For some reason, it is not letting me insert without erasing everything after it.
So are we to believe the Raiders may again lead the league in penalties this year because:
(A) the NFL - a joint enterprise of its franchise owners - secretly has it out for the Raiders (and Al Davis) and has given the officials a directive to flag the Raiders whenever possible in close games; or,
(B) the Raiders are inherently an undisciplined team.
from J-mac:
"The Raiders’ decision to wait around for Nick Miller to get healthy was costly in terms of kickoff returns. Oakland is ranked dead last in kickoff return average at 22.9 yards and has been stopped 18 times inside the 20 _ the most in the NFL."
__________
Nick Miller is an undrafted rookie FA who was kept on the 53-man roster until placed on IR this week.
Not having a legit return specialist has been far worse for the Raiders than a few bad calls by the officials.
Just another reason we need a GM, yesterday!
Here's my theory on the play calling.
As soon as Russell walks out onto the field, as an opposition DC, I'm stacking the box and saying "you ain't running, Russell will have to beat us." I will also send at least one to the quarterback to keep pressure on Russell on every play.
The odds are Russell ain't getting the job done. The geldings stacked the box, but Russell fooled 'em. He actually played like a decent QB.
It is very hard in the NFL to be effective if you are one dimensional. With Russell in the game, we were one dimensional. Defenses took that dimension away and Russell could not make up the difference.
Had he been able to, we would have run roughshod over several teams.
I said several weeks ago that the playbook seemed more open and varied with Gradkowski or even Frye in the game.
Cable is a much better play caller when his quarterback can execute the plays and complete passes.
The problem is Cable waited 5 games to long to sit Russell down.
TYSAISTI,
H
NYRaider, it is quite possible that the answer to your A vs B question is:
Yes.
JMHSO
---Jeff
H - 2010 can't come soon enough, huh?
The whining continues. Amazing.
When we have another losing season next season, I wonder what the Al cultists will use as an excuse this time. I mean, it couldn't be the average personnel we have on both sides of the ball, the disorganization, poor coaching, outdated schemes or - gasp!!! - Al Davis.
“TYSAISTI” should have read “TMSAISTI”.
Apologies.
NYRaider,
It’s already 2010 in most of the world. However, I think the NFL year officially starts March 1. If that’s so, then we should reconvene for a New Year’s Eve Celebration on February 28th.
Onadonandon,
For one thing, I’ll still be a fan, will you?
If I don’t get back before, I would like to take this opportunity to wish everyone here a happy and healthy New Year. Prosperity is up to you and is optional.
I’m starting the New Year off right, I’m doing a batch of Irish red ale. I’m down to my last porter, might have to resort to store bought to get through the next three weeks.
Actually what I need to do is get a second fermentation bucket so I can do two batches at once.
H
Al Davis is the reason for the officiating, his struggles against the league will never be mended. Most Raider fans know this, the old time fans do. Like I say, ask the players, not just the Al clingons, The Snake will tell you, Tatum will tell you, The Stork will tell you, Matt Millen. THEY KNOW, they actually played.
It's not the main reason for losing, but it sure doesn't help when you have an avg team at best. It's funny, when arguing with the "crew", they would frame all good points against Al as " Al haters". Then, now we have the socalled" Al Haters" turning the tide and labelling anyone as a CT'er who says there is a bias. Others pinning the " why can't you see there is more important..." diversion.....
Just talking about a history of ref bias, don't have to put a label on it = WHINING. It's a topic and it is a good one when writing about the Raiders. A topic that media types would never touch, wonder why that is....more dots coming into play.
JONES
man you guys are a bunch of hardliners!!! it's extreme right wing raider fans vs. extreme left wing raider fans. when the TRUTH lies somewhere in between. it's either all Al's fault or it's the league and refs fault. face it, it's both. there have been many bad decisions by our beloved team and we are definately screwed more often than not by the zebras. the combination has put us in the 7 year funk we now face.
as far as Al and the franchise decision making goes....i agree that Al at this point in his life needs a helping hand. but not for the reason so many in here feel, that the game has passed him by, but because in football at any level to be the elite there is one constant that always holds true. "we shall not be outworked". period thats it. and at this time in Als life i don't think it is very difficult to outwork us. he has too much on his plate at the moment. (as does the HC) he needs some quality hard working help.
the zebras? c'mon, week in and week out we are worked by the refs. it's not just one call a game, it's every call and every ball spot. we are spotted at the point where the knee first hit the ground if not further back than that. and they are spotted at the point to which they bounce. it is almost funny to watch. been that way since i can remember. the big three, lytle the snowjob and the imaculent deseption are just the obvious ones that the entire world saw when they wanted the other team to advance in the playoffs. it was obvious to us raider fans as well as the rest of the known football world.
but even some of you hard liners have to admit that if the game was called even for every team we would be having a hell of alot easier time at getting this ship righted. the PIs the pushoffs and all the terrible holding calls to bring back big plays. it's not that hard to see but pretty difficult to watch.
just sayin.....
frkyraider
HNY to you as well H. To answer your question, yes, I will always be a Raider fan. I was born and raised in Oakland, and I can't change my heart after all these years. The team has represented the hopes and aspirations of my childhood community for decades. Not even the Bill Walsh era combined with he Raiders moving to L.A. could turn me away from that, so 20+ years of mostly losing isn't going to change that now. I've had issues with Al Davis going back to handling of Marcus Allen (the beginning of his 'ego-first' era IMO).
And no, I don't hate Al's loyal fan base, but I am a fan of the Raiders first. That means I'm a fan of the players who join our community and fight for us every week. I'm disappointed in Al's obsession with lawsuits and getting everything he can out of the other guy at minimal cost, even when that cost is so much higher in the long run. The problem is that we don't have the mechanisms in place to be successful, even with the fairly average personnel we have being accounted for. And yes, I'm irritated by all the excuses for Al and all the false hopes. Cable doesn't run this team IMO. I don't believe the players think he is a man in charge, even if they like him. Everyone knows who runs the show, and that has been alluded to by several Raider players, past and present. Moreover, Cable is a person who has failed miserably as a head coach at the college level, whereas the preceding coach had a winning record. I don't see him being able to wrestle the team from Al and make the changes necessary for this team to win. We need a charismatic and intelligent guy to make Al feel like he's involved more than he is. That's my take. Call it hate or whatever you want, but I think there's a record that backs my views up: 20+ years of being one of the worst franchises in the NFL is no accident.
Working on my Racer 5 and Belgium ales today BTW. Cheers mate!
Al starting running this team poorly over 20 years ago, so I think the game has indeed passed him by. He's holding on to schemes and philosophies that don't work in today's game. There are several defenses and offenses from opposing teams who have commented over the years that they knew exactly what we were going to do. I don't buy that Al suddenly out of nowhere became overworked. He ran this franchise into the ground decades ago with his obsession with speed over skill, undisguised defense alignments and all-or-nothing deep passing attacks. Only Gruden/Allen offered us any relief from this. It's when Al gives up control that this teams plays better, and I think the facts bear this out.
All the whining sounds hypocritical to me.
Heh.
---Jeff
ONANDON....I agree, we all know it, even the "Al lovers" now admit that Al can't do it. The ref thing is just another part of it, IMO. How any Raider fan can say there is no bias towards the Raiders is mind boggling. Just like saying Al Davis isn't outdated in his methods, is mind boggling.
Al is a target, he is a target with the league and the Press. IMO, he has brought it on himself, his rebel attitude is now punishing him. The league keeps the screws on to make Al step down, Al continues with motivation to show them wrong again. Meanwhile, we the fans, suffer year after year while Al continues his futile fight. We are all suffering because Al's own legend is eating him....all we are saying...is to give change a chance.
JONES
It seems magnificent phrase to me is
Then stop whining Ark. Direct your frustration on the source rather than conjuring up half-baked conspiracy theories. I see poor officiating throughout the league, not just with the Raiders. We are undisciplined and Al prefers it that way..from the horse's mouth buddy. That's where it's at.
Quit cryin', throwin' tantrums and actin' like a baby.
---Jeff
Too rich, coming from a birther. ;-)
Take just shut this joint down for a while. This blog is getting just as bad as the Israeli Knesset. They disagree on everything.
Calico
I can't believe that with all your football knowledge you can not remember a single call going in favor of the Raiders, could it be because there has NEVER been any?
Yes the owner sucks, the coaching sucks but the players are mostly 2nd and 3rd year players, they don't have solid coaching and therefore you can not blame them, they don't know what wining is, they get presured by the refs. looked at our best offensive players (Miller and Murphy) they can not make a play because they get called with a penalty, they are being punished because they play for the Raiders, somebody before me made a comment about Mandy Moss, why is it that he has not ever been called for offensive pass interference, you mean to tell me that he changed his ways?
WTF do you want ANO, other than to not be recognized?
You want a hand holding love fest, with everyone in agreement singing kum-bye-ya???
Then the internet is not for you dude.
-moshbucket
PS:
Jones, "only since about 68 or 69.."
I love it.
Just a note, the imaculate deception was a double wammy, not only screwed out of another chance at SB, but Stabler's play long scramble to take the lead before the steelers last drive would have gone down as one of the greats.
To Anon 4:23 -
You are right, I'm unable to cite a specific blown call in favor of the Raiders. Blown calls are remembered because it was either (a) a recent game such as the Murphy call or (b) a memorable, significant game (ie. Tuck Rule). I'm sorry but I have a hard time remembering plays from countless years ago let alone what I ate for lunch yesterday.
BTW, I'm still waiting for you to take my challenge below:
"Go ahead and cite all of the bad calls that have gone against us this season that altered the game. Then explain how this 1 play dictated what the Raiders did immediately following. Beyond the questionable Murphy call in week 1, you will be very hard pressed to name any calls that altered ANY game this year."
Blown calls bother me if they are egregious, alter a game's outcome, or take place in a meaningful, significant game.
I'm not going to make a mountain out of a mole hill when it comes to any minor, questionable calls that took place the past 7 years because in the big scheme of things, it is irrelevant. Oh yeah, I'm so pissed off about that 1 blown PI call in 2006 vs. the Chiefs in our 2-14 season ... yeah, right.
We can talk about the bias, blown calls, vendettas, conspiracies all we want. It can be rather entertaining. Regardless, it is a very low priority or concern of mine at this point in time.
There has been a couple blown calls in favor of the Raiders that are on the top of my head...Holy Roller of course...Stabler threw it forward, should have been an incomplete pass, good thing it wasn't = great Raider history.
The year the Raiders won their first Super Bowl...first game of the playoffs was against Jim Plunkett and the BOSTON Patriots....Snake was 4th down and 7 or something in that neighborhood, drops back throws to the sideline..incomplete...wait a minute, flag in the backfield. Roughing the QB on a D-lineman ( can't remember his name). Raiders continue to drive to the winning score. The guy kind of hit Snake in the head...for back then, the rules were much more lenient, it was CHEESE....take it though.
Talking about the refs is a great topic...looks like scrooge doesn't want us to talk about it...oh well, keep on keepin on.
JONES
Jones: You gave 2 examples of plays that worked in the Raiders favor. The 1st one was a completely legal play at the time. The 2nd one was a subjective call that aided our cause. The point that I've been trying to make but has fell on deaf ears is that 1 play, 1 blown call, typically does NOT determine the games final outcome. Sure it can make a difference ... makes things easier for the beneficiary of the call and harder for the team that had it against them BUT what did the team do after the call? Using your example of the roughing the passer penalty on Stabler, this play didn't result in a TD. It was what, 5 or 6 plays later that Stabler got the Raiders in the end zone. If the Patsies make a play on D, it would be a different story. These types of scenarios happen in games ALL the time for ALL teams. There are many different contexts and shades of grey depending on game circumstances that goes into the discussion. Some "blown" calls happen at critical junctures of the game. Some "blown" calls happen in playoff games. Some are minor errors or are merely questionable but not obvious.
Saying that the Raiders lose games because of the refs is blowing things WAY out of proportion.
Saying that the Raiders have had more than their fair share of dubious, questionable calls is fair.
Doesn't appear as if the NFL agrees with some of the assessments made here.
Fines levied:
Tony Stewart $25,000 (contact w/official)
Richard Seymour $10,000 (pro wrestling)
Stanford Routt $5,000 (head butt)
Happy New Year to all!
Here’s a good piece by J-mac in which he encapsulates a decade of mostly irrelevance for the Raiders.
http://tinyurl.com/ybpl62o
Here's to hoping for a happy, joyful and prosperous New Year for errybody!
*Especially* those I disagree with. I want you to know that I don't hate you just because I disagree with you.
That is all.
JMHSO
---Jeff
Holy Roller..maybe you should look at how Snake "fumbled"....it was a forward pass, not a fumble.
The play against the Patriots, YES, if the penalty wasn't called, NO SUPER BOWL. Do you think that call affected the Pats...probably did, got rattled, it's the difference between winning and losing.
Blown calls can make the difference between winning and losing, psychologically it does make a difference and at some points of the game, A BIG difference. Get a couple blown calls and it is downright deflating. These calls can change momentum in an instant.
The refs hold massive power, they can control a game and they can influence an outcome. To say the Raiders have never lost a game because of the refs is ridiculous. If the refs didn't have this power, why are they prohibited from betting on games? It's because they can influence an outcome...
JONES
Prime example CJ....Super Bowl, Steelers vs Shithawks...1st blown call cost the hawks a TD, next blown call was Rothenberger (whatever) given a TD when he was well short of the goal line. You could see the Hawks losing momentum over these calls and you could see the Steelers gain momentum. These calls took the game out of the Shithawks hands, that game was rigged and it was very obvious.
JONES
I have no clue how to sync my library to my iphone with the remote app. It gives me that number and i have no idea what to do with it.
[url=http://unlockiphone22.com]unlock iphone[/url] [url=http://www.treemusic.com/%7Etree/cgi-bin/cutecast/cutecast.cgi?session=oE7GoykM9hQJaKOH44nRN9yaGR&forum=2&thread=187324]unlock iphone[/url]
Couple of vids to show you what I am talking about.
Al vs the league =
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhnIKKUXjcM&feature=related
Holy Roller play =
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUuOqUIHBZc
JONES
Classic 70's Raiders; Madden smoking a cigarette on the sideline; players taking cheap shots; and Davis pumping his fist in victory.
Today’s Raiders are pussies by comparison - not even a fraction of their former selves.
Davis and the Raiders no longer carry the clout to justify the kind of bias that is being claimed for Sunday's loss. They are the victims of their own mental breakdowns as well as the same bad officiating that plagues the entire NFL.
NYR - Agreed.
Blown calls have affected all 32 teams.
Saying a game is 'rigged' is nothing more than speculation.
I don't doubt that the refs bungle many calls. The very nature of their duty and the sport that they officiate is prone for human error and yes, some bias.
Bias is a very loaded word though. The way that the players interact with the refs and how they conduct themselves on the field often times influences the refs judgment.
The Raiders have 2 paths to navigate and overcome the refs bad calls.
Path 1 is to be more disciplined, professional, and focuesed on the field.
Path 2 is to perform at such a level that a few bad calls doesn't affect the end result.
For the past 7 years we have been an undisciplined and low performing team so the ref issue, as far as I'm concerned, is irrelavant.
Refs take abuse from all teams, do the Raiders have special swear words that make the refs madder at them? Don't think so, the Raiders don't hit the refs, they don't spit on them, so how can the Raiders be more unprofessional towards the refs than any other team? That theory makes no sense.
You have to have a very special team to keep overcoming the refs, do you EVER see N.E or the Steelers having to overcome the refs? I don't, I see them get favorable calls.
Corruption, why is it you think the league is so pristine? The league makes so much dough, wields so much power that it is ripe for corruption. I see it....how many times have you said to yourself " this is as bad as pro wrestling" while watching a Raider game? NEVER?
No one is saying that it is the cause for the Raiders continual losing. I will say it happens though and you can ask the players...if you know any, ask them, they will tell you flat out that the refs screw the Raiders, it's fact.
JONES
Jack just go back to your own blog, where you only get 3 to 5 hits every 2 months.
YOU SOUND LIKE THAT A--HOLE THAT'S THE HEAD OF REFS. Perreta or whatever his name is. Keep defending the NFL and it's refs.
SCALR8R
Ah, the zebras. In 48 hours, it will be a moot point, because for the seventh consecutive year, we will not even be sniffing a game in January, and it will be other teams that have to worry about them as we curl up into the fetal position: Bad zebras, bad!
So wail away, my friends. Don't be like Greg Ellis. Keep the focus on something the Raiders apparently cannot control, as opposed to something they can (such as their own staffing and operations, and not throwing the ball four times from the two, and not starting DHB to the point of absurdity, and...), so that you can join the chorus of excuses that have virtually become our slogan: Commitment to Excuses.
But the game whistles will fall silent on Sunday afternoon, and we can finally cease rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and talking about the 1970s, and get back down to the the very same needs we were talking about this time last year: qualified GM, qualified head coach, sensible draft.
I recall when I was the devil incarnate last spring for daring to bring up these things, and for pointing out that our preseason was a sad precursor of things to come. Oh, the negativity!
Well, a new year is upon us, and let us RESOLVE to steer the Titanic in a new direction, with fresh leadership, without excuses. Oh, won't that be swell.
The year is new, and hope springs eternal.
Take like you, I hope there is change within the Raider organization, but I seriously doubt it. We all know as long as Al is still around it will never happen. All the talk and suggestions go into deaf ears up in Alameda.
Take, opinions now = excuses. WOW!!!
Take, are you going to curl up in a fetal position when the Raiders blunder the draft again? Or how bout when Cable gets fired and Fassel gets hired?
Why is talking about the refs taboo? It's been haunting the Raiders for decades and we can't talk about? Because the Raiders have "bigger" problems? Are you afraid it might ruin your chances at a job with the league if your blog is talking about it?
I thought this blog was for talking about the Raiders..whether you decide to pretend it isn't happening, we get it. Trying to convince others that it can't possibly be true and it isn't worth talking about = what's your angle, Take?
JONES
Sure, in the context of the team, certain opinions are excuses.
It is Tom Cable's opinion that we would be a playoff team if Russell hadn't started so many games. That's also an excuse. Who started him for so long?
Some folks here have held opinions for years now that have excused the Raiders for numerous blunders, repeating the same excuses that the Raiders themselves use.
So sure, certain opinions are excuses.
Well, Jones, as I've said before, I think that the Raiders do get jobbed on occasion (but not last Sunday). Perhaps unfairly. And I don't object to talking about it...in PROPORTION with our many other concerns.
What has happened here is out of proportion with our circumstances. The lowly Browns and Rob Ryan handed us our a**es last week. But those zebras, boy, they were the real problem.
Funny how those same zebras didn't find a way to screw us on all those last-minute victories this year. If they are really out to get us, they are doing a poor job of it, waiting for a blowout against the Browns to really bare their teeth.
So go ahead, talk all you want about it, get it out of your system, because in 48 hours, we won't hear another meaningful whistle for nine months.
And for nine months, our fate will not rest in the hands of the zebras, but in the hands of the organization.
And I will pick up right where I left off this time last year, saying the same things for which I was pilloried last last year. I'm looking forward to it.
Anybody know any good GM candidates?
Take, Cable saying that the Raiders would of been a playoff team if they hadn't started Russell is not an excuse, it's just plain stupidity on his part for not benching him sooner.
Take, you don't think I have been pilloried? It's usually what happens when you tell the TRUTH.
No one is blaming the loss last Sunday on the refs, some, including myself, are saying there is bias towards the Raiders...why do you and jack always say it is about last Sundays loss? This is a tactic used by Blanda, it deflects the TRUTH and muddles the point. It's much bigger and for a longer period than just one game.
JONES
Take, yes I heard of a good candidate for GM. Let't throw Calico into the mix. He seems to have a lot of knowledge within the organization. He will right the titanic in a hurry.
Well shit, how can anyone blame Cable for decisions that aren't even his? That decision was made by the man upstairs, no not that one, it is Al Davis. So, it comes around to the same ole point, doesn't it? I say the ref bias is in direct relationship to Al's feud with the league, spanning decades....the drafts have been poor because......drum roll.....Al Davis makes the decisions.
Remember all those arguments with the "crew"? Art Shell drafted Huff, that's what they kept telling me. But it is a well known FACT that Al makes the top picks.
So, is this what we need to write about? Every post? How much Al needs to step down? Well, I have covered that ever since I arrived here. So for a few days the topic became the refs...oh the shame.
It is very relevant when speaking about the Raiders.....suprised it's not talked about more....but, with guys like you who SHHHHHH the subject = that's not supposed to be talked about, it takes the luster of your reality that " it's not even possible, the league would never do that". ASK A FREAKIN PLAYER.
JONES
SCALR8R -
Hi, my name is Calico Jack. I'm a Raider fan with opinions. Hence, I have my own blog and comment on other blogs. What's your problem? Is it that you have a different opinion? You are welcome to voice your views but it is weak and immature on your part to say,
"Jack just go back to your own blog, where you only get 3 to 5 hits every 2 months.
Just curious but why do you care how much traffic I get on my blog? Do you honestly think I've been blogging for 4 years for money? to rack up hits?
Oh, I get it. You are upset because I don't buy into the conspiracy theories, "vendeattas", and distortions about the refs. Keep on making excuses. You are right ... the reason the Raiders have 7 consecutive double digit losses is because the refs keep screwin' them. Yup. That's it.
Jones:
For all practical purposes, the words "unprofessional" and "undisciplined" are virtually interchangeable when discussing the Raiders penchant for a high number of penalites. Such infractions as;
illegal procedure, off-sides, making contact with a ref (Stewart), headbutting an opponent (Routt), cursing out the ref (Seymour), pulling a player's hair (Seymour). ALL of these penalties stem from a lack of discipline and have absolutely NOTHING to do with the league out to get us. Obvious blown calls makes up a very small % of the infractions.
The bottom line:
The Raiders have been one of the most penalized teams over the past decade (and more). The reason for the majority of the penalties is a lack of discipline and accountability.
So now the refs are blamed for 7 losing seasons? Who ever wrote that? You see Jack, you did it again, a smear campaign to distort the truth, why do you continue to do that? Blanda has taught you very well.
JONES
Raiders have ALWAYS been at the top or near in penalties, it's the Raider way, haven't you heard? Yes they do create most of their own penalties, what's your point? What does that have to do with ref bias?...you are shuffling the point again....
Again, you are trying to use one game as your example...where as I allude to decades of bias...I really couldn't give 2 shits about the last game, it has nothing to do with the point of ref bias...stop trying to move the walls.
JONES
Jones:
I'm not moving any walls. Let me state my view this topic once again.
Last game, this season, the past 7 seasons ... blown calls have been irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong, I don't dispute that there have in fact been blown calls.
However, I refuse to get wrapped up in worrying about something that has had ZERO impact on our fortunes in the past 7 years.
It is the equivalent of focusing on a hang nail when you've got a much more serious ailment that needs to be treated.
>>>>
Raider Take said...
Go ahead and talk about the officiating, just don't expect me to make it the story of a game in which we got taken to the woodshed in all phases by the Browns.
>>>>
Wowsers. Not sure I have ever seen a game where the opponent gets out gained by over 100 yards as "taken to the woodshed in all phases".
Fry coughed up the ball is why we lost... the game was pretty even besides that... even the TOP was nearly identical.
And then you take the time out from your incessant whining about Al's decision making, to tell others its silly to whine about the "Raider bias" in officials?
WTF??
Are you the only one allowed to whine about subjective stuff one has no control over in this forum, RT?
And I take exception to Nate's assertion Cables playcalling cost us 5 games. The way Jamoney was haphazardly throwing the ball against Wash made that game almost impossible to win regardless of the play calling. And what calls was he supposed to make with Jamoney as QB in any of those games?? His hands were already tied (4 of the 5 games had JaMoney as QB).
I agree with the consensus that Al needs a GM though... so I guess there is something. lol
NY
So 3 Raiders were penalyzed more money than I make a year, I understand that but what about the brown player that instigated all this crap, did he get fined, no right? classic NFL!
>>>
Last game, this season, the past 7 seasons ... blown calls have been irrelevant.
>>>
I reject this out of hand too.
Blown ref calls are irrelevant with GOOD teams because they are good enough to overcome bad calls against them.
Crappy teams getting consistently shit calls keeps them from winning 2-4 extra games every season... simply because all there are never any winning blowouts.
Would it make a difference in the big picture? Not much... but winning 6 to 8 games every season would make this Raider fan a hell of a lot happier than the 4 to 6 we are saddled with every year.
FAR from irrelevant.
Well jack, if you refuse to "worry" about refs calling the Raiders differently, FINE. Why do you write about then? Who are trying to convince, me, or yourself? Why are you making out like the whole point of the refs is what happened on Sunday? I smell a disinfo campaign going on, the question to that is why. I get it, you don't think it exsist, why do you need to go on about it then?
JONES
We all know there are bad calls in every NFL game.
We also know that a bad call depending on the game circumstance can impact the result.
I guess where some of us draw the line in the sand is the relevancy and actual # of "blown" calls.
Gary said,
"Crappy teams getting consistently shit calls keeps them from winning 2-4 extra games every season"
Really? Give me specific examples of "blown" calls this year that would have led to 2-4 more wins. If you honestly think the Raiders would have won 6-8 games these past 7 seasons, you have not been paying attention to ... drum roll please ... the actual games.
As I've stated ad nauseum, the vast majority of penalties incurred by the Raiders is their own damn fault for being undisciplined, unprofessional, and unfocused. Yes, there have been questionable, subjective, and blown calls but this is a very small, insignificant percentage.
For example, in 15 games this season, I can only think of 1 "blown" call that possbibly altered the game's outcome ... the opener/Murphy TD.
I'm open to hearing about more specific examples from this decade but I'm tired of hearing about stuff from decades ago or the rehashed "Tuck game", "Lytle fumble", "Immaculate reception".
Jones:
All I'm doing is (1) responding to other posts and (2) giving my honest opinion.
Disinfo. campaign? Give me a break.
A disinfo. campaign is taking a topic (bad officiating, over-inflating it, and then using it as a crutch for the Raiders ineptitude.
Who's using it as a crutch? Just saying it exsists, do you really believe that I think the Raiders woes are because of refs? Come on, at least try and use some reason here.
You say you are just trying to give your honest opinion, why are you trying to use deceitful tactics? You keep insinuating things.. that aren't being written. No one blames 7 years of losing on the refs, but you keep repeating that point = DISINFO.
JONES
Anderson's QB Rating: 90
Frye's QB Rating: 53
Browns Net Rushing Yards: 164
Raiders Net Rushing Yards: 88
Browns Coaching: Balanced attack, ball control
Raiders Coaching: Imbalanced attack, no ball control.
Oh, but we did gain those extra 100 yards because Cable hallucinated Charlie Frye as Dan Fouts, asking him to pass 46 times with predictable results. So take that, Browns!
We lose to the lowly Browns 23 to 9, but Gary sees a victory in there somewhere. Typical. That must be why he's so content with the status quo in Raiderland.
>>>>
Really? Give me specific examples of "blown" calls this year that would have led to 2-4 more wins.
>>>>
I assert we would have beat Cleveland without the refs singling out the Raiders right before half and giving them a gift TD, and assert we would have beat SD if they hadn't taken 4 points off the board in game one with the WIDELY panned Murphy TD reversal.
Thats two games in one season... how a team finishes the half dictates how a team plays the rest of the game, IMO.
Can I remember two games from every season? Prolly not... my memory is not that good. But can I think of calls I have never seen before against any other team that prevented us winning close games?
-The game where a TD was taken off the board late because Gallery got called for blocking in the back as he pushed a player as he tried to wheel around him at RT. You see this literally 20 times a game because that is WHAT THEY ARE TAUGHT TO DO, plus on top of that, how is it illegal for on OLman to block in the back when Dlmen are regularly spinning at the line?
-The close game where our our RG got called for tripping taking a bomb TD off the board when all he did was move his body sideways and the DLman tripped over his feet. We lost by 3 IIRC.
I will also present as evidence two pro-bowl veteran linemen both mentioning how there seems to be "Raider rules" (Seymore and Sapp) I don't remember either of them whining about the refs before they came here... although with Sapp, I'm sure it is possible. His "somethings fishy going on here" is really interesting though.
BTW Calico... I was mostly just taking on your comment that the calls are "irrelevant"... I think thats a stupid comment. If it irrelevant why even have refs? Calls don't matter?
EVERYTHING is relevant in the game of football... its why its called the "game of inches."
>>>
RT:
We lose to the lowly Browns 23 to 9, but Gary sees a victory in there somewhere
>>>>
I was simply taking on your wildly inaccurate, and borderline retarded statement that they "took us to the woodshed in all phases."
If the fucking TOP was equal, and we had nearly 200 more passing yards... what are you saying??? TOP and passing yards aren't "phases" of the game???
How about the kicking game.. did they take us to the woodshed there too? Or did you miss the 61 yard FG??? Or isn't the kicking game a "phase" of the game either?
I am guilty of hyperbole myself at times, but holy crap... there's hyperbole and than there is THIS!
Words are important RT.
>>>>
A disinfo. campaign is taking a topic (bad officiating, over-inflating it, and then using it as a crutch for the Raiders ineptitude.
>>>>
I know you weren't talking to me but theres a big difference between using it as a crutch, and it being "irrelevant".
I agree with you... the Raiders need to simply put better teams on the field so the special "Raider Rules" become MORE irrelevant... but that still doesn't excuse the existence of it in the first place.
Why would anyone excuse a bias in rules against a single business?
You're right, we didn't win the kicking game! They were 3 for 3 and we were 3 for 3. Plus, we intimidated them with a 61 yard kick. What an oversight on my part. I feel horrible.
So our QB tosses three pics and no TDs, and has a rating of 53, and their QB tosses one TD and no picks and has a rating of 90, but we gained more yards, so Gary thinks we did better than them in the passing game. Classic.
Hey, everyone's out to get us. The Zebras, Rich Gannon, and now Ricky's, too! Good to know that when we should be looking for a GM, instead we're taking action against the web site of the Raider Nation's top gathering place:
"Gruden, now on the "Monday Night Football" broadcast team, remains popular among Raiders fans. On the eve of the Dec. 14 broadcast at Candlestick Park, Gruden was honored during a festive night at Ricky's in which former and current Raiders employees showed up to party with the former coach.
That infuriated Davis, and a team staffer called Ricky's to ask it to remove photos of Gruden posing with current Raiders employees from its Web site. Gruden is seen in a No. 34 Bo Jackson jersey and Raiders visor that he purchased on site. Fans chanted for him to return to Oakland, and Gruden wasn't dismissing the possibility.
"It was a pro-Raider party," said Ricardo, not understanding Davis' distress. "The guy (Gruden) is working for ESPN. ... It's like the Gestapo over there."
I will say, it's quite amusing to see Gary on the same side of an argument as Jones. That's worth the price of admission right there.
Anon -
“NY ...what about the brown player that instigated all this crap, did he get fined, no right?”
Penalties for the scuffle were offsetting. I believe Seymour was fined for arguing with the official after the offsetting penalties, which prompted a second flag on him.
Listen, I believe the Raiders get screwed on bad calls, none worse than the “Tuck Game,” but sometimes they are their own worst enemy, not the officials.
If you look at clips from the 70's, you will clearly see why the officials had to stay on their toes with the Raiders (cheap shots and down right nasty play). That’s why many of us were drawn to the Raiders to begin with. Embrace it. It’s part of the Raiders’ heritage.
But that doesn’t carry into today. The Raiders are wimps compared to then, and their penalties are mostly mental breakdowns, with bad officiating thrown in for good measures.
We’ve all heard people say the NFL is better off $ when the Raiders are successful. So why would the NFL be trying to sabotage a team that can’t get out of its own way? It’s bad business, plain and simple.
The Raiders would have to be relevant in order to garner such attention, if such could even exist in today’s NFL.
Even with replay reviews, NFL officiating sucks. Watch enough of the playoffs this year and you will see first hand.
Take, that story about Ricky's doesn't give us much hope for the future. It’s indicative of the delusional oversight that continues to control the team’s every breath. The stranglehold is getting worse, not better.
Who says there is no bad blood between Gru and Davis? Again, TRUTH comes to the forefront. How many times have the "crew" said that Gru and Davis were cool. How many times did they say Gru left cause he wanted to be closer to his family? I love it when the truth comes out.
JONES
Same side? Truth has no sides Take.
JONES
You know it's time to question one of your "truths" when _______
I'll let you fill in the blank.
Take, Calico and everyone that believes there's no ref bias against the Raiders. You guys must live in that fictional land called "AL IN WONDERLAND". A place where NFL and ref bias toward the Raiders, DOESN'T EXIST.
SCALR8R
I don't know how many times I have to say it: I do believe that the Raiders receive an inordinate amount of weird biased calls.
I don't believe this was the case during the Browns game. Did Cable even raise his voice at the officials when the flags were flying? No. Are the players contesting their fines? Not that I've heard.
We got screwed in the opener against San Diego. Now that was a blown call with ramifications. I was watching it with a Chargers fan, and even he was amazed.
I also know that we've won three-last minute games (would have been four if DHB hadn't dropped the ball), and I didn't see the refs trying to stop us from winning with any ticky tack calls on the final drives in those games.
So it's probably just a part-time conspiracy. A moody one, intermittent and hard to pin down.
But just because I'm not going to indulge the misplaced wallowing about the refs after the Browns game, you'll keep saying that I excuse referee bias against the Raiders, instead of acknowledging what I'm actually saying.
The more you focus on the refs (and Rich Gannon, Ricky's sports bar, and all the other bogey men who are out to get us), the more you foster the culture of excuses that has gotten us into this mess.
The whistles will stop blowing in 24 hours, and will be silent for the next nine months. Then what?
Take,
Don't jinx Nam and Shane.
They'll probably hit Nam with some bs PI or DH, and not call roughing on Shane in the pro-bowl!!!
;-)
-moshbucket
Take, it's not about the last game or the past 7 seasons. It's about all those dubious off. and def. pass interference, all those phantom def. holding, all those ticky tack unneccery roughness penalties that all other 31 teams get to get away with, first words out of the analysts' mouth are "they're letting play". What about all flags that are thrown against the opponents, then some idiot ref out of nowhere comes and says there's no flag on the play. We never get that treatment, we always get the penalty. This is only half of the story. Now the other half is the rules only seem to apply to the Raiders. Remember 2 or 3 years ago when that charger reciever caught the ball, fell to the ground untouched, got up spiked the ball, we recover the ball, one of the idiot refs gave the ball back to SD, ruling it was illegal foward pass. Where was the taunting penalty for spiking the ball? Last week Miller 80 on a ticky tack flag got a 15 yards penalty. Now can anybody other than Take and Calico tell me if that isn't ref bias. I can go on and on. This is just 1 example of ref bias.
SCALR8R
The O-line is gonna be in for a looong day against the Ravens. Langston was by no means a savior, but definately a servicable stop-gap. Without him it's gonna be pretty sketchy. If anyone else goes down, jamarcus might get some more playing time, 'cause Frye will be running for his life, and might not make it through the game.
If that happens, hopefully they can go ahead and end Jamarcus' career. Normally I wouldn't wish that on anyone (severe injury), but JR has already banked 30+mil, so F him and his fur coat. It's not like I want him dead or something.
That big fool does have a pretty good chin, though.
-moshbucket
Gary said,
"I assert we would have beat Cleveland without the refs singling out the Raiders right before half and giving them a gift TD, and assert we would have beat SD if they hadn't taken 4 points off the board in game one with the WIDELY panned Murphy TD reversal.
Thats two games in one season... how a team finishes the half dictates how a team plays the rest of the game, IMO."
For starters, I have acknowledged the blown call on Murphy and blown calls against the Raiders in general.
In reference to the Cleveland game (don't get your paties in a bunch Jones, I'm responding directly to Gary), the way we finished the 1st half was our own doing not the refs.
Routt - headbutt (automatic flag)
Seymour - cussing out the ref (subjective call; what did Seymour actually say to the ref? None of us know but I don't doubt that Seymour crossed the line with his language to a ref who just broke up a scuffle)
Stewart - swiped the refs hands off of him (automatic flag)
Yes, I think the Miller penalty was bogus. Guess what, a few players later, Cleveland got ticketed with a PI.
PENALTY on CLV-H.Poteat, Defensive Pass Interference, 24 yards, enforced at CLV 26 - No Play.
A few players later we are at the 2 yard line and 1st down and fail because of negligent playcalling.
Saying the refs took the game away from the Raiders vs. Cleveland is asinine.
We failed on 3 red zone opportunities.
Frye throws 3 INTs / Anderson 0
Our D gets gashed by Harrison for 148 yards.
Our HC calls for 45 passes and only 18 rushes against one of the worst run defending teams in the league.
Calico... the spiral downward didn't happen until AFTER the bogus double foul deep in their own territory... I think what Seymore was bitching about was why it wasn't JUST a penalty against Cleveland, which would have put them even deeper in their own territory and a loss of down. My point is if the refs had simply called the foul on Cleveland, who knows what would have happened?
I doubt VERY much they would have scored a TD because they were floundering horribly until the refs decided to punish the Raiders for complaining about their calls.
Their decision to call fouls on both teams completely changed the game.
Does that mean for a FACT we would have won... I am not saying that. Just that things like this always seem to happen against the Raiders, not for them. That is the bias.
>>>>
So it's probably just a part-time conspiracy. A moody one, intermittent and hard to pin down.
>>>
I TOTALLY agree with this. As I posted earlier, it seems like every third crew comes in with an anti-Raider bias.
The is kind of secretive about which crews are working which games, but I bet if enough research was done, one would be able to pin-point the crews we always have problems with. A gambling person could make a killing knowing what crews were coming into Raider games IMO. Its why its such a secret (ok that was conspiracy theoryist).
>>>
Raider Take said...
I will say, it's quite amusing to see Gary on the same side of an argument as Jones. That's worth the price of admission right there.
>>>
Ouch.
lol
>>>>
Raider Take said...
You're right, we didn't win the kicking game! They were 3 for 3 and we were 3 for 3. Plus, we intimidated them with a 61 yard kick. What an oversight on my part. I feel horrible.
>>>
So in your book EQUALITY is being "taken to the woodshed" now?
Intellectual dishonesty.
>>>
So our QB tosses three pics and no TDs, and has a rating of 53, and their QB tosses one TD and no picks and has a rating of 90,
>>>>
Sigh.
I look at short term passer ratings as nothing more than a statistical masturbation devise. Its such a complex position with so many intangibles, statistics can be misleading, especially because it doesn't account for yards after catch, dropped passes, tipped passes for int. short little TDs to wide open receivers, etc etc.
I don't mind it as a career guide, or maybe even a year-long guide at best, and even then, I doubt you would find any GM that would even look at it in terms of evaluating the worth of a QB. Aside from the two horrible passes, there is no sensible fan that can watch the game last Sunday and say Anderson played TWICE as well as Fry.
Thats just insane.
>>>
but we gained more yards, so Gary thinks we did better than them in the passing game. Classic.
>>
Here we go again.... the caveat for me was simply "not taken to the woodshed"... thats what I took exception to.
Words DO have meaning with you, right?
... And I do mean TWO horrible passes... the third interception was mostly on Higgins making a lazy cut on his route, and then not going after the ball when he had plenty of time to do so. Good receivers sometimes become great defenders.
Why none of our receivers practice this seems to lead me to think we have some problems at WR coach.
Gary:
You act like Seymour didn't deserve the 1st off-setting penalty. Here's what happened:
C Mack instigated a tussle with Seymour and Seymour retaliated. This is the reason for the off-setting penalties. The additional penalty was called when Seymour argued with the refs about the original penalities.
You write,
"I think what Seymore was bitching about was why it wasn't JUST a penalty against Cleveland, which would have put them even deeper in their own territory and a loss of down."
I'll tell you why. Seymour retaliated hence the original off-setting penalites.
Further, you write,
"My point is if the refs had simply called the foul on Cleveland, who knows what would have happened?"
How is that possible. Are you implying that Seymour didn't retaliate? As we all know, more times than not, it is the retaliator who gets flagged when the ref doesn't see what the instigator did. In this case, the ref saw both the instigating and retaliating action.
Ok... I just looked and take back that the QB has any worth at all even career-wise.
Look at the all-time list:
http://www.profootballhof.com/history/stats/top20/passer_ratings.aspx
or
http://tinyurl.com/ybhcahe
If Dante Culpepper, Jeff Garcia, and Trent fucking GREEN are listed above Tom Brady career wise, we have here what you call a shit statistic.
Flush it.
Brad Johnson 15?
AARON BROOKS... 22?????
Meaningless stat.
Calico... I didn't see ANY of the replays on the three fined plays.
Did you?
If so where?
How do you know Seymore retaliated?
Considering I didn't see a replay of the play in question that I assert handed the game to the Browns (maybe I missed it, but I don't think they showed it)... so here is what I am basing my opinion on according to JMacs blog:
Seymour himself:
Seymour was responsible for back-to-back penalties during the Browns’ 93-yard scoring drive near the end of the half. The first, for unnecessary roughness, was offset by an unnecessary roughness call on Browns’ guard Rex Hadnot.
Seymour, however, protested and earned an addtional 15-yard penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct.
“ I asked him a question like, ‘Why did you throw it on me?’ He didn’t even know he called (it on) me,” Seymour said. “The ref didn’t know what number is was supposed to be on. It was a bunch of mess.
“I guess he just tried to figure out who he wanted to throw it on. I was the lucky number, which I’ve never seen anything like that in all my days of playing.”
Okay, since you're so upset by passer rating, I'll simplify it for you:
One QB: One TD, no picks
Other QB: No TDs, three picks
Woodshed, baby.
You think Cleveland would trade passing game places with us for the privilege of those extra yards? Give it up.
Once again, you're trying to lead us down rabbit hole; you've been wrong about basically everything in the grand scheme of things, but boy, if I forget to include field goals in the statement "all phases," well, that's just the end of the world.
Go review the bulk of your statements for the past two years before you get back on your high horse.
And another reason we got so many yards on passing is because another phase of our game, coaching, asked Charlie Frye to pass 45 times. So many of those yards were just a symptom of a coaching failure.
>>>
Go review the bulk of your statements for the past two years before you get back on your high horse.
>>>>
Oh goodie... this has been just another faux internet dick comparison thing all along, huh?
Tell us all about your enormous schlong RT... see if I care.
JFC.
I still say a game where the TOP is equal and we outgained them by 100 fucking yards is not "woodshed" no matter how big your dong is.
It's getting creepy in here.
Offense, Defense and Coaching, we got schooled by the Browns. They kept us out of the end zone, and they more than doubled our point total, and they played to their strengths (running) while we played to our weakness (passing).
'Nuff said, no matter what you say.
Sorry if you're offended that I might take offense to terms such as "intellectually dishonest," "liar," "F*** you," and some of your other favorites.
It's ironic that the only time in the last six years we've seen Rob Ryan's prevent defense work was when he played it against the Raiders.
That's woodshed worthy right there.
RT you remind me of what I call in politics "binary thinkers" where your entire world is either black or white... a "0" or a "1".
Everything else is meaningless to you.
You look at the scoreboard and see 23 to 9 and think "They obviously played at least twice as good as the Raiders."
Me: "Uhh no... if you actually watched the game, besides some weird penalties and 2 horrible passes the teams were pretty much even."
RT: "But the score was 23 to 9... we got woodshedded."
Me: "But the TOP was even and we outgained Clev by 100 yards... how is that a woodshed?"
RT: "The score was 23 to 9 and the other QB had nearly TWICE the passer rating... it was a woodshed."
Me: "Fuck the score and fuck your retarded passer rating .. anyone that watched the game saw two evenly matched teams.
RT: "There you go again with the naughty words...
GAAAAAAAHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhh!!!!
BTW RT... did you ACTUALLY watch the game? You strike me entirely of someone that reviewed the score and stats and determined (with his binary mind) that the Raiders got woodshedded.
Me:
No, I watched the whole game.
I watched the coaching staff make bad calls and abandon our top runner with 25 minutes left in the game.
I watched Rob Ryan's unit keep us out of the end zone.
I watched our defense give up two touchdowns and a ton of rushing yards.
I watched them run a punt back for 45 yards and a kickoff back for 39 yards.
So, yes, I saw it all.
I know that you were heartened by this butt-kicking. Somewhere in there, you see a victory. I get it.
Time to come out of the rabbit hole and address the things that continue to produce failed seasons: GM, coaching and draft.
We're right back where we started, aren't we? Maybe you'll change your tune (finally) after a seventh failed season.
>>>
It's ironic that the only time in the last six years we've seen Rob Ryan's prevent defense work was when he played it against the Raiders.
That's woodshed worthy right there.
>>>>
Let me tell you a story..
I used to play AA volleyball with this 6'10" guy that drove me absolutely crazy. He couldn't pass at all, and his hitting was erratic at best... I gave him every chance in the world to succeed (he was frigging 6-10, who wouldn't?) until I finally got fed up and cut him. What happened? The very first time we played AGAINST him he was all-world... passing nails and nailing any set he got.
I'm thinking.. if he would have done that with us instead of against us, I would never have cut him.
That said... is there ANY Raider fan out there pining for the return of SOB? Please.
Return of SOB? Who said anything about that?
The obvious implication here is that Rob Ryan - the incompetent DC we couldn't wait to get rid of - out coached our offensive playcalling, courtesy of Tom Cable.
Maybe this is what's going on...After watching the Raiders lose 38-0, 44-7, 29-6 and 23-3 this year, we have redefined the concept of a butt-kicking, and now 23-9 against the Browns is a sort of victory. That must be what's happening here.
gary, the link you posted doesn't have updated stats. Or isn't inclusive. Or something.
Tom Brady's career passing rating is 93.5 his rate+ is 117
And for the record:
Brad Johnson 82.5/105
Aaron Brooks 78.5/98
Duante Culpepper 87.7/110
Trent Green 86.0/108
Jeff Garcia 87.5/111
I also want to say that even if the two penalties against Seymour and Routt were bogus (bear in mind Routt calmly left the field after he was ejected, hasn't denied he headbutted anyone and so far is not contesting his fine) the ball was moved to the 46.
I mean a gift TD would be penalty that moved the ball to the two yard line. Oh, wait.
>>>
Time to come out of the rabbit hole and address the things that continue to produce failed seasons: GM, coaching and draft.
>>>
Ok.. I will concede this biggest-dong contest and address the future.
I like our future if we keep Cable (for at least one more year) and cut JaMoney. If Al adds a GM, I will get even more hopeful.
OTOH, if we dump Cable and force our new coach to try once again to make JaMoney the face of the franchise, I will be right here with you next year with the gloom and doom and incessant whining, regardless of whether we have a new GM or not.
The only caveat would be Gruden, and I sure as hell don't think he is stupid enough to think he can turn JaMoney into an elite QB.
My point is... if JaMoney is QB, what coach in their right mind would want this job? Fassel? Please.
Now if we can bring in a new GM, a new coach, AND we dump JaMoney's sorry ass.. I will be all in!
I simply dont see it happening with Al.
It will be either Cable and no JaMoney, or new coach with JaMoney.
There's a binary equation I am pretty sure of... and JMac agrees.
He also agrees that Cable/new QB is better than new coach/JaMoney.
>>>
nyraider said...
Return of SOB? Who said anything about that?
The obvious implication here is that Rob Ryan - the incompetent DC we couldn't wait to get rid of - out coached our offensive playcalling, courtesy of Tom Cable.
>>>
He did have some nice blitz packages that I would have really welcomed in any of the 5 years he coached for the Raiders, but other then that, he simply stuck 8 in the box to stop the run and challenged Frye to beat us passing.
Except for the 2 horrible passes, he did.
Not sure I have ever seen any other group of fans pretending giving up nearly 400 yards of offense as an ass-kicking before.
Would any of you allow me to do this if the Raiders won?
Gary - the Raiders abandoned the run, Ryan didn’t take it away. The Raiders avg 4.6 yards per carry, but simply stopped running the ball.
Meanwhile, the three INTs were no accident. Browns played a lot of soft zone and waited for the Raiders to make those mistakes. Conversely, it’s our obsession with MTM that keeps us from those kinds of turnovers.
So in a game against a 3-win team that gives up almost 25 points a game, we score 9... only because our kicker nails the longest FG in team history.
Toni, spot on and amusing, as usual.
From Jerry Mac
"If you’re still holding out hope that Jon Gruden may some day make his way back to Oakland, consider that a club staffer phoned Ricky’s Sports Grill and Lounge and requested that all photos from the Dec. 14 party hosted by Gruden with current employees of the organization be removed from the restaurant’s Web site.
Good to know that as the Raiders move forward to recapture their greatness, they’re focused on the right things."
We have seen the enemy, and the enemy is Ricky's!
I don't think Ricky's has a vendetta against Al, I think it's because it is a good place to party. Maybe Ricky should phone Al to see if it is OK to put up pictures, Al just might take him to court.
Ok, I think THIS is the reason for 7 losing seasons, not the refs, I change my mind.....Calico, we got some new points to argue, go ahead and tell me Ricky's has nothing to do with losing..go on, give it your best shot.
JONES
A few years ago, what about that time, when the squaws off lineman was holding our def lineman, spins him around, his feet in the air, hit the rb and we get a tripping call. That was 4th down, no flag for holding. We stopped them, game over we win, BUT oh no, 1st down squaws, few seconds left they sore a td and win. NO NFL AND REF BIAS THERE, RIGHT?
SCALR8R
Good one, Jones. Very funny.
New take is up: Free Ricky's!
buy diazepam diazepam for dogs effects - buy cheapest diazepam online
generic valium cost of generic valium without insurance - valium 10mg flying
ativan online generic of ativan - ativan difference between xanax
can you buy xanax online legally xanax pills and kilograms - pictures of generic xanax pills
order ativan online lorazepam 1 mg to buy - ativan side effects paranoia
cheap diazepam online buy valium online without rx - diazepam clonazepam
buy xanax online cheap no prescription drug interactions synthroid xanax - buy xanax drug
ativan pills snorting lorazepam 1mg - treatment of ativan withdrawal
buy cheap xanax klonopin help xanax withdrawal - canada drugs online xanax
zolpidem drug generic name of ambien cr - ambien high yahoo answers
ambien zolpidem ambien sleep 4 hours - ambien cr does pill look like
buy ambien online printable ambien cr coupons - how to order ambien online
buy valium roche buy cheap valium mastercard - valium recreational use
buy soma carisoprodol kidney function - buy discount soma online
carisoprodol 350 mg order soma online to texas - carisoprodol opiate
Post a Comment
<< Home