Free Ricky's!
Word is now out that the Oakland Raiders asked Ricky's Sports Theatre & Grill to remove photos from its web site depicting Raiders employees partying with ESPN commentator Jon Gruden in December.
I have two words for that: Free Ricky's!
So many bogey men, so little time. Rich Gannon. Boo! Jon Gruden. Boo! The zebras. Boo! Ricky's. Boo! Who has time to look for a GM with all these bogey men out there?
Never mind that Ricky's has done more to nourish the Raider Nation more than any other place besides the Coliseum asphalt. Never mind that the Gruden party was a harmless and increasingly rare feel-good celebration of the Oakland Raiders.
You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch.
We have reached the point of truly surreal absurdity, have we not? Can we afford to waste one atom of energy on such things, mired as we are in a record-setting streak of losing seasons?
Apparently, we can. Which would explain a lot.
Free Ricky's. Free the Nation.
src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
I have two words for that: Free Ricky's!
So many bogey men, so little time. Rich Gannon. Boo! Jon Gruden. Boo! The zebras. Boo! Ricky's. Boo! Who has time to look for a GM with all these bogey men out there?
Never mind that Ricky's has done more to nourish the Raider Nation more than any other place besides the Coliseum asphalt. Never mind that the Gruden party was a harmless and increasingly rare feel-good celebration of the Oakland Raiders.
You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch.
We have reached the point of truly surreal absurdity, have we not? Can we afford to waste one atom of energy on such things, mired as we are in a record-setting streak of losing seasons?
Apparently, we can. Which would explain a lot.
Free Ricky's. Free the Nation.
src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
posted by Raider Take at 7:47 PM
822 Comments:
Al Davis is a petty piece of garbage. I am very much looking forward to the day when he is no longer the owner of the Raiders. Then maybe, finally, we can put all this losing and other useless nonsense behind us.
Sarasota Raider
Ricky's is irrevelant. Don't try to change the NFL AND REF BIAS.
Ricky's is irrelevant? You, sir, have never been to San Leandro.
But the photos on Ricky's web site? Yes, those photos should be irrelevant to the Oakland Raiders, considering all of the real (not imagined) challenges facing the organization.
So who made them relevant by demanding that they be removed?
It probably was that IDIOT SUCKASS John Herrera. And no I've never been to Ricky's, but the next time I go to a Raider game, I will go and check it out. Now I'm on a mission, to see for myself, if Ricky's has any revelancy or not. I hope that they aren't the ones making all these stupid decisions that are being made Alameda.
in Alameda. My bad.
Clearly the "eye" (Al Davis' priorities) is not on the "prize" (winning football).
Just think ... without the Gruden/Allen tenure, we would be looking at possibly 12 consecutive double digit loss seasons.
And Calico, if Al Davis lives another 20 years, I truly in my heart believe, that we will endure 27 consecutive losing seasons. Nothing that comes out of Alameda can convince me otherwise that this team is capable of a winning season with Al Davis in charge.
Sarasota Raider
Thank God, that I am 33, and God willing, I will live to see the day that the Raiders are under new ownership. I feel sorry for you old timers, it is a good thing you were around in the 1970's to see the glory years, because those are going to be the only glory years you will be seeing, with Davis in charge.
Sarasota Raider
Now I hope you all know why the league has "cause" to promote ref bias vs the Raiders. I mean, what Al is doing to Ricky's, if you were league commish, what would you do? You have a league full of owners who are just shaking their heads, wondering how whacked can Oakland get. It's embarrassing to the league...
Where are the Al lovers on this one? This is HUGE proof of " One flew over the Cuckoo's nest", shock therapy isn't working. Can't wait for Blanda to go back to work....
JONES
I get it. Davis was in Ricky’s one night, got really drunk and was bounced out; and now he’s pissed at Ricky. Because that would actually make sense.
This should make it crystal clear to anyone who thinks Gruden left on good terms; he did not. Davis showed Gruden the door because he was getting too much credit for the Raiders’ success to suit Davis. Ok, in real terms, Davis wouldn’t recognize nor pay Gruden his due.
It’s a vicious cycle, folks. We’re lucky enough to land an up-and-coming assistant (between a sea of retreads) who earns his wings as HC and might take us to the SB, and we run him out of town instead of propping him up and paying him his due.
Then, when that coach - who’s said nothing but ALL the right things about Al Davis and the Raiders - comes back to Oakland as part of his media job and takes time out to celebrate his days as a Raider, we chastize him.
Is there a psychiatrist in the building? .... cause there ought to be!
Ok, I’m no Dr., but here’s what Google game up with:
Paranoid schizophrenia
“Positive symptoms are symptoms that indicate the presence of unusual thoughts and perceptions that often involve a loss of contact with reality.
In paranoid schizophrenia, delusions are often focused on the perception that you're being singled out for harm.
If you have any symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia, seek medical help as soon as possible. Paranoid schizophrenia doesn't get better on its own and may worsen without treatment. However, if you're like most people with paranoid schizophrenia, you may not recognize that you need help or that you even have symptoms, especially because your delusions or hallucinations are very real to you.”
Yikes!
If I were the owners of Ricky's, I'd post the correspondence right in the center of all the pictures!
And here's to hoping the Ravens defense "woodsheds" us by allowing us 400 yards of offense today!
I'll take 400 yards of offense for a "woodshed" every game next season too!
RT, any idea why the "Free Ricky's!" thread wasn't linked on Raidernews.com? Probably nothing, right?
Well, we know someone who'll be happy if we lose by two touchdowns, as long as we gain 400 yards.
I've never seen someone so giddy about a loss to a three-win team in week 16 in which we were kept out of the end zone and outscored by two touchdowns.
Do I need to conduct a course in Standards Raising 101 again?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anyone who would brag about losing to the Browns of all teams is clearly clueless. But then, you're talking about a guy who once claimed that Gannon should have ran rather than throw the ball after a stellar performance and Raider win. Basically, whatever Gary says, the opposite is true 99% of the time. And yet Gary will still brag about it. Insane in the membrane, indeed.
Not sure, NY Raider, why this didn't get picked up by RaiderNews. They do pick up a lot of takes, so I can't complain. Probably hard to catch everything, every day on the world wide web.
NYR -
When push came to shove, the reason that Gruden left after the 2001 season is that the original contract that had been agreed upon earlier in the preliminary stages of negotiation had been stripped of the 2 key provisions:
(1) the authority to pick his own 53 players
(2) the authority to pick his own coaches
Beyond being uncomfortable with Gruden getting so much credit, Davis had/has serious issues with giving authority to others.
Today's game ...
The Ravens have a stout D and excellent run defense. The Raiders have had little to no success running the ball vs. the Ravens this decade.
Having said that, Cable still needs to commit to the run for 4 quarters. Bush is a big, north-south runner who is nimble enough to find small creases, run between the tackles, and ocassionally bounce it outside.
Do I think Bush will have a 100+ yard day and run at his current average of 5.1 YPC? No but it is critical to still establish the run. The 2,3,4 yard carries are important to make the Ravens play an honest D instead of pinning their ears back and teeing off on Frye.
Gary:
You seem positively joyous and elated about the hollow 400 yards the Raiders accumulated vs. the 3 win Browns. I guess scoring TDs (or in our case singular, TD) isn't high on your list for offensive productivity.
CJ, you were one of the "crew" who always said there was no animosity between Gru and Al. That it was purely a business decision...I like the way you just skim over this and imply that there were really only 2 reasons why he left.
Well, the Ricky's situation shows CLEAR animosity. Al despises Gru so much, that he has Gru's pic's taken down because he wants nobody on his staff being seen as buddies with Gru.
You were wrong again CJ, just like you are wrong about Gru's over the top celebrations directed towards Al. Just like you are wrong about ref bias. Things go on behind the scenes that the press doesn't write about. You shouldn't deny them until you get the real story. The real story comes from people who have been there, not from media.
JONES
Nope... read what I wrote again.
I simply said I hope we get "woodshedded" but get 400 yards offense again.
That is ALL I said!
How many games do you think a team can lose if they average 400 yards a game?
Isn't that something DESIRABLE??
I never said I wanted anything else... just 400 yards of offense.
Does anyone know how to READ here?
Jones:
You are taking what I write out of context.
The point I've made countless times and have blogged about on SBF is that the REAL reason (aka "The TRUTH") that the Gruden/Davis relationship didn't last longer than 4 years was control.
Was animosity a by-product of the authority issue/business decision. Yes. Gruden resented Davis for not being able to:
(1) the authority to pick his own 53 players
(2) the authority to pick his own coaches
Davis resented Gruden for wanting more power and the credit Gruden had deserved.
Gary:
I'd love to get 400 yards of offense vs. a very tough Ravens D but most importantly, I would like to see an all around team effort (Coaching, offense, defense, special teams) that leads to a "W".
Jones:
I'm still waiting for you to provide ANY source, link, clip, article, quote etc. that backs up your RIDICULOUS & ASININE contentioin about the "100 yard Gruden evil eye" stare. Sorry Jones but you are delusional. Keep on making shit up and stirring the pot ... it is quite entertaining.
Also, in regards to the animosity issue it is clearly a "chicken before the egg" argument. What created the animosity? (See my earlier post). Has additinal animosity been built by Al towards Gruden AFTER the split? Yes. Think about it. Davis resents that Gruden wanted more power. Davis resented that Gruden's Bucs took the Raiders to the woodshed (sorry Gary). Davis resents that Raider fans still clamor for Gruden.
http://www.mercurynews.com/sports-headlines/ci_14113661
Monte Poole makes an interesting case in terms of Al needing to hire Texas Tech's Mike Leach.
Could he convincingly turn around Russell? He did prefect the spread offensive and is an architect at developing high powered offenses. Offensive minded coach, college experience yields very little in pay: $2 million or less. He can also show case Run DMC and DHB.
Cable will be gone at the end of the season. Most of us know that. Al will not hire GM, tho John Madden was recently asked the question by the N.Y. POST.
“Does Al Davis need to hire a GM?"
"Well I think he knows he needs to. Knowing what Gruden and Allen did, they had success there.”
But hey there's always Jim Fassel. Cause no one else has coveted the owner for 4 straight years and
lobbied more for the job than Fassel. Besides who else would want to come here, right?
free ricky's? while i disagree with the organization asking for the pictures to be removed from ricky's website, i can see the point behind it. gruden in raiders gear partying with current employees give the "rumor mongerers" all the ammo they need to run with scissors on this story. it's the whole art shell thing all over again. there has been no decision made YET to fire cable. but thats not the way the mediots will spin it. pretty petty non the less.
besides all that i would think after protesting about talkin about ref bias towards our raiders and having bigger and more important issues at hand that this would be a non-story here at raider take. wouldn't ref bias be a bigger and more important issue than this? my guess would be yes. but then i am getting used to you guys searching for all the negative things you can find to rip the raiders. lord knows there plenty of it. you know what they say, if you go thru the world looking for shit, what are you going to find? thats right, shit!!!
frkyraider
If they're looking at Ricky's website than they had to see the billboard.
The height of the ridiculous.
Just when you think it can't get any worse. Oh, sorry I am not including the upcoming double digit loss to the ravens today....
I've had it. Only a few more hours 'till it's over.
I guess it matters less why Gruden left than the simple fact that he did.
Coming off 7-9 then 4-12 seasons courtesy of Mike White and Joe Bugel, Gruden clawed the Raiders back to respectability with three straight division titles. So instead of rewarding his coach, Davis made it impossible fo him to remain.
Then Davis began an era of unprecedented losing under Callahan, Turner, Shell II, Kiffin and Cable. Each successive hire was less inspired than the one before it.
That’s not what a decent GM does, i.e., direct his team away from success and back to failure.
And now we’re probably a week or two away from another overhead projector extravaganza. This time “for cause” will be demonstrated through a pattern of physical abuses toward assistant coaches and spouses. All to save a couple dollars in multi-billion dollar industry.
Penny wise and pound foolish!
"while i disagree with the organization asking for the pictures to be removed from ricky's website, i can see the point behind it. gruden in raiders gear partying with current employees give the "rumor mongerers" all the ammo they need to run with scissors on this story"
Really, Frykraider? You can see the point behind the petty, unnecessary, and bizarre idea of removing a harmless photo of a former Raiders Head Coach in a Raiders bar? A Raiders bar with a photo of a HC who won 2 divisional titles ... oh no, what will patrons think?!
What the Ricky's story shows is that the Raiders organization is more focused on the peripheral issues as opposed to the larger, more pressing issues that actually effects Ws and Ls.
as i stated, i disagree with it. you quoted me on that statement. and yes i also staed that we have more pressing issues.
you don't agree that those pictures will lead to the mediots goin off about us firing cable and hiring gruden prematurely?
you seem to want to jump all over me evey time i post CJ. whats up with that? do you just hate my positve attitude and open mindedness or what? maybe my lack of rippin my team in every post i write bothers you. even tho i agree with alot of things that are said here i don't rip them every chance i get, thats just me. i don't expect you to understand.
frkyraider
Frky, I see this as a very important issue. It's an issue of organizational priority and fan alienation, two huge pressing issues as we head into the offseason. It's a direct window into the soul of our ongoing problems.
Why are the Raiders so worried about what the media say, including Rich Gannon? Why are they worried about photos on the web site of the Raider Nation's signature gathering place? How can their skin be so thin? The Bay Area media market is negligible compared to New York or Philly in terms of media intensity. This team needs to grow some stones and focus on the right things instead of keeping track of press clippings and restaurant web sites.
No, I don't agree that those pictures will lead to the mediots goin off about us firing cable and hiring gruden prematurely?
No, I don't jump all over you every time you post. I respond to the comments and give my opinion. My opinion is that is pretty shallow and hollow to surmise that a photo of a former HC in a Raider bar is going to lead to mediots speculating. If it did cause speculation, who FN cares.
As far as you being positive about the Raiders ... good for you. Surely you can understand why other Raider fans like myself have been frustrated and disappointed with our team the past 7 years. When there is something to be positive about, I happily throw in my 2 cents.
frustrated and disappointed, as am i CJ.
RT, it's not just the bay area media, it's all media up to and including Shefter and the professional liar. why give them anything to run with scissors with? frankly i am surprised that they haven't claimed that Al has already decided to fire cable. and btw i do agree that it is petty and rediculous. and we do have bigger and more important things to deal with. but i can see the organizations point. Al din't like it when they did this with Art II and i'm sure the organization thinks it would happen again. we are mearly trying to curtail the circus until we open the big tent for real!!
frkyraider
Many companies would ask to have thier employees removed from a third parties web site. And frky was right about the rumors. I really don't care either way, kind of irrelevant if you ask me. Maybe Al is just trying to limit the amount of ammo Gruden has when negotiating a new contract? Not likely.
And why does every keep saying Gruden left? Al TRADED Gruden. Chucky was onboard for another year. Glazer was pestering the crap out of Al. Al told him what he wanted. And eventually Glazer bit. Was a head coach ever traded for the amount we got? 2 #1s, 2#2s and 8million? Might have been a few later round picks in there to, can't remember.
Anyway, I was firing up my grainy internet feed and the radio, and low and behold in the background I see the raiders! They're actually televising it here today!!! Because the Ravens need the win to get in.
-moshbucket
where's the bias now? That's the second call this drive that benefits the Raiders on a third down play.
Think about it Jack, those things you mention about Al having "cause" to hate Gru = PROFESSIONAL...the taking down of his pics at Ricky's = PERSONAL. Big difference.
What created the animosity? It started the same way it did with Kiffin. Gruden had a mind of his own, Gruden felt he had been hired to be HC, Al gave power and then wanted it back. This was "cause" for Gru to cause a riff between them. This was the start of it.
Gruden has not said a bad word about Al, but you know he still likes to rub Al's face in it. You don't think Gru knew the Ricky thing wouldn't go over well with Al? Come on Jack, you have to stop thinking that what is told to the press and what is reported by the press is not the full story, EVER.
As far as showing proof of Gru dissing Al...can't provide it, just say a little bird told me.
JONES
Good news, the incomplete call was overturned.
Goodell gets on the phone, screams:
Why didn't these refs get the Conspiracy Memo!?
Since when are the Raiders concerned about bad press, if you can even call a rumor to bring back Gruden bad press.
Maybe the Raven's aren't welcome to the playoffs? Flores was shocked the call went the Raiders way...he said, maybe the refs are making up for Murph's TD on Opening Night.
JONES
NOT, should NOT be in that sentence, my bad.
JONES
The conspiracy memo was put out long time ago, not just last week....Take, ask some former players, see what they say...they played, are you going to mock them?
JONES
and the bad news to go with your good. no flag on the LB that stuck his forarm into McFadden's chest loooong before the ball gets to him. i guess goodells call came late.
frkyraider
Frye is tough...he needs to stick, same with Grad...Jamoney needs to go. The team will never play for him. There are some good things on this team, but there is always the otherside of it that tears it all down. If the Raves win, does Pittsburgh make the playoffs?
JONES
Safeties and SP are very weak today. The rest of this team is trying to win.
I couldn't figure out why everybody was boo'ing.
And alas Russell is coming into the game.
why is Russel playing?
Not sure. Fyre went into the locker room right before the end of the half for treatment.
He was taking a beating though. At one point the medical staff was looking at his knee. Or hip.
Same as it ever was. Thank you owner, GM, head scout and head coach Al Davis fer another shit season. Take your senile ego and shove it up yer ass.
:-) Ahhh, that feels better now.
Thank God the 7th losing season is finally over.
Ok Al, let the bodies hit the floor.
Russell again shows he's not the guy he thinks he is.
http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Russells-enormous-cost-to-the-Raiders.html
Read the following article it is very interesting.
Raiders 2010 Opponents
Home
Denver
Kansas City
San Diego
Jacksonville
Tennessee
Miami
Seattle
San Francisco
Away
Denver
Kansas City
San Diego
Indianapolis
Houston
Pittsburgh
Arizona
St. Louis
ny
You are such a moron, you see a game where a playoff team plays better than we do and for 4 quarters we are toe to toe and with a possibility to win the game with jamarcus as qb and basically no penalties and that's the best you can do.
Anyone who justifies 20+ years of losing much less the last several years is a moron in my book. Hope rings hollow when it consistently amounts to nothing; moreover, we have a owner more interested in lawsuits and his own ego than winning. No spin can change that reality.
Well, that settles it, we have officially extended the NFL record for consecutive seasons of 11 or more losses.
>>>
nyraider said...
where's the bias now? That's the second call this drive that benefits the Raiders on a third down play.
>>>
RT was right about this, and I agreed.
It's not a league-wide problem.
There are 16 crews working and only 4-6 of them have an anti-Raider bias. Its still enough to add one or two losses per year IMO, especially if the Raiders have a mediocre team.
The officials were pretty outstanding today.
Our defense stunk again.
Morrison needs to leave.
...the previous post.
If you cover one eye and squint with the other, then stand five feet back from your computer screen, you'll see that we actually won today.
Question: If we swap Morrsion for Ray Lewis, do we win this game?
I say hands down. None of those long running plays would have happened, and that's the difference in the game.
Gary, that 4:53 anon post must be you.
"...for 4 quarters we are toe to toe...."
Toe to toe?
The Ravens averaged 6.9 yards per carry, outrushing the Raiders 240 to 51. That's toe to toe?
Sadly, Russell 9/14 for 102 yards and 1 INT was one of his best halves this year... although he did have a fumble (but that pretty much goes without saying).
Frye 18/25 for 180 yards and 1 TD. He had no fumbles and managed the game pretty well... and threw in some nice play action as well.
Russell just seems to suck the life out of this team. The o-line look to be in more rhythm with Frye, but immediately had a stupid false start when Russell went in.
I don't know if I can handle Russell coming back and even being given a shot. I've seen enough!
I would add that the Raiders went an entire season and never fielded a legit kick return specialist. They mostly used fullbacks. Brilliant GMing and coaching on that one!
If 11+ losses each year ever becomes in vogue, we are golden!
Warm up the overhead projector.
The overhead projector is the new guillotine.
At least we finally matched Norv Turner's highest win total as a Raider.
The O-line is supposed to be Cable's specialty, yet it allowed Frye to get knocked out of the game again. Cornell Green has got to go. No more speedsters, its time to put some beef on the O-line. I wonder what the odds are of Cable being HC next year?
5-11 Again
"The Ravens averaged 6.9 yards per carry, outrushing the Raiders 240 to 51."
Is that 'woodshed' material Gary?
I might be over-simplifying things but ...
Isn't the essence of a good football team the ability to stop the run and run the ball?
240 to 51. The final score was relatively close but we got mauled. No 2 ways around it.
7 consecutive seasons of 11 losses ...
7-11 "We are always open for business. Come buy a slurpee!"
I agree with Gary. We went toe-to-toe with 'em. Don't forget, we had 274 passing yards to their 90, bringing the total offensive yards to 330 for them and 325 for us.
The difference in this game was the turnovers, period.
Always pays to get the complete picture.
JMHSO
---Jeff
Ark -
When you run the ball for 240 yards and score three rushing TDs, there isn't much need to pass. Right?
Meanwhile, the Raiders were well on their way to another pass-happy perfomance before Frye went down because they couldn't run... yet they were forced to run when Russell was in.
the seasons over...thank God...
oh crap...i just remembered...
the raiders...will play again...
next year...
and our GM...is 80 years...OLD...
with so many...holes to fill...
and so many...naps our GM...must take...
how can we...compete with...
the elite?...
oh yes...i forgot...
the greatness...of the raiders...
is in...the future...and this...
must be...true...since the present...
sucks so much.
Season's over. Time to move on to bigger and greater rumors. Like, with Bruce Allen with the DC Sunburns, can John Gruden be far behind.
Rick Leach is already rumored to be coming to the Raiders. Couldn't be a worse pick. He openly sought other jobs and only came back to Texas Tech when the other teams wouldn't kiss his ring and give him everything he wanted.
The only thing I will say about the Ricky's thing is I believe the key maybe "ESPN". But, until official word comes down, we will never know.
Can't read all 64 to see who is feuding with whom, but Sunday showed why Russell isn't the answer. Even when he had time, he was still tentative.
It further showed we need help on the O-Line (for the fourth consecutive year at least), and a solid run stuffer in the middle on defense.
I got a little tired of hearing "74 on the offense" for false starting, at home no less. Of our only 5 penalties I think 3 where on 74.
Calico,
I wouldn't exactly use the word "mauled". The bulk of the run yardage was three plays. Then there was the long return at the end of the first half, but the defense stepped up.
There were several 3 and outs by the defense early in the second half to keep us in the game. Russell then threw the interception that led to the TD, then gave up the fumble when we could have moved down to tie.
Anon,
Only a true moron would would call someone names without identifying themselves in some way.
Take,
We didn't win, but we went toe to toe with them. Not a moral victory, but the team never gave in.
We had better TOP, 4 sacks 6 QB hits.
Gary,
No, if we swap DHB or Russell for Michael Oher, we probably win.
Maybe this is the year we get my wishlist, O-Line and D-Line. We have seen that Gradkowski and Frye can move the offense, but we have to keep them healthy.
The defense, overall, was better this year. More aggressive, more sacks, more blitzes, more tackles for loss. They had the habit of giving up 2-3 big plays a game that really hurt. But the attitude and hustle was there.
We don't need a "veteran" presence at WR to show the others what it takes to play in the NFL. Schilens and Murphy are doing that. It's called hard work, study, pay attention to the coaches and a QB who can get the ball to you.
This team is not as far away as the record indicated this year. The key is how those remaining problem areas are addressed. We keep the core in tact and work on O-Line and D-Line interior.
H
I think it's pretty safe to assume we can all pack away our wish lists for the off-season. Santa Davis isn't delivering again this year.
Think of it as if the Raiders' management is on strike.
Raider00 - Davis will be 81 when the 2010 season starts... if that makes you feel any better.
Ark doesn't get it. The game is won and lost at the line. When a team runs for 240 yards on you, you have been dominated. Beyond that, the "big picture" is that we lost another game, and continue to be one of the worst franchises in football.
Here we go again with the "we're not that bad" line.
In fact, we're the winners of the Super Bowl of Moral Victories.
Stay the course, if we keep improving by one win per year, we'll reach .500 by 2013, and after that, watch out!
It's going to be a long offseason of excuses, because they're already starting less than 24 hours after the end of our last game.
The bulk of any large yardage ground game comes from long runs. Not a very good excuse for a average to bad defense. I don't see much improvement, if any, next season.
Every season the Al jockers say the exact same thing. The reality is that the improvement they're seeing is in their mind. Only a new GM, and a coaching staff - picked with a purpose - can change the organization around. There's no two ways about it.
Let's break it down, shall we?
Areas we're up:
First downs: us: 20, them: 16.
Third down : us: 6/13, them: 6/14.
Total plays: us: 62, them: 58.
Passing yards: us: 274, them: 90.
Penalties: us: 5/30, them: 5/37.
TOP: us: 32:14, them: 27:46.
Areas they're up:
Turnovers: us: 2, them: 0.
Total yards: us: 325, them: 330.
Rushing yards: us: 51, them:240.
And of course, the important one:
Points: us: 13, them: 21.
No excuses. However, a mauling it was not. The rushing yards vs passing yards is a wash. 5 yards in offense is not a killer. However, turnovers *ARE* the killer. *THAT* is what lost us the game. Period.
---Jeff
Onandon -
" I don't see much improvement, if any, next season."
Not true. Let me explain why. Next year Russell and DHB will have another year under their belts, we'll have Nick Miller "back" to return KOs, Jano and Lechler will each have another monster year, Gallery will be healthy, we'll still have the 3-headed monster at RB, we'll secure Seymour with a franchise tag, re-sign Morrison and maybe Howard too, and we can look for some more speed in the draft, or perhaps the infamous Al Davis player conversion (draft a player to play something other than his natural position and watch him fail miserably)...
...uhhhh, never mind.
Ark - give it up. "Areas we're up" and "areas they're up?" What's that all about?
Don't you see a pattern here? The Raiders are losers of 11+ for seven straight seasons.
In today's NFL, you actually have to try to be that bad. It doesn't come easy.
Jim Zorn got fired this morning:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8157eb10&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true
Leading candidate to replace him...Mike Shanahan. Bruce Allen moved fast. Will Cable still be the coach next year or will he swing in the breeze till February and then see the overhead projector?
Ricky's is awesome. Al Davis is really petty, and horrible at what he does.
NYRaider, I was explaining that we didn't get mauled in that game. It was turnovers, plain and simple.
The rest is common knowledge. You've not shed any light on anything, other than how you're jumping to a completely different argument and wondering why I didn't argue that one instead.
One argument at a time, huh?
---Jeff
"The status quo is not acceptable," new Redskins general manager Bruce Allen said in a statement released by the team. "I felt it was necessary to not waste a moment of time to begin building this team into a winner."
What a concept.
Ark, we were dominated on the line. Did you watch the game? I'm guessing no.
Turnovers didn't help. Getting run over didn't, either.
"With the 8th pick in the draft, the Raiders take________, the speedster out of_________."
Realist - my money is on Cable swinging in the breeze until at least February, maybe March, i.e., unless Davis can find "cause."
We can always just send more assistant coaches to the Combine.
NY Raider-
At least we won't be worried this year about whether or not the HC is wearing Raider gear.
NYRaider,
That’s too gloomy. Even though I agree with my grandfather (Wish in one hand, piss in the other, then tell me which one is wet), this is sport and hope springs eternal in the heart of the sports fan.
Father-in-Law of H will be 83 this year, still sharp as they come. But, he can use some help.
It’s kind of like Apollo XIII. What do we have on the ship that works, then we figure out how to get the other things up to snuff so we can get this ship home. There are many things on this ship that work, or are starting to. The holes are pretty glaring, so let’s attack them. Now what we need is the engineer working with Ken Mattingly on the reentry procedure.
Take,
I refuse to go with half empty. Just me. I see positives, and I don’t see that as a fault. In order to build, you must have a foundation. We have a foundation in some good young talent. Now we need to add some body armor in the O-Line and D-Line. There are other things we could do, but they are minor compared to those two.
I’m with you Arkansas. A “mauling “it wasn’t. Flaco was sacked 4 times and hit several more. Schilens, Murphy and Miller caught 21 passes, several of them chain movers on third down. How many games over the past years did we see Russell complete half that many to the entire team, not just to three players.
RaiderRealist,
Did Bruce Allen also not waste a moment of time telling his owner not to hand out 100 million dollar contracts to a single player?
Now, if, as many point out here, Al listens to his players, Cable will be back.
From Nnamdi, “"My two cents is definitely that continuity is big," said Asomugha, a seventh-year player who hasn't had the same coach for more than two years. "If it turns out it is something that we're talking about, I'm sure that myself and other captains on the team will speak up on Tom's behalf."
Personally, it wouldn’t bother me at this point. We certainly are not getting there with a revolving door at HC. I would, however, bring in a true OC.
JMNLHSO,
H
For me, it starts with the GM position. Without that, I don't think we have a true foundation.
Who is our GM? Who is our director of scouting?
Question to John Madden: Do you think Al Davis should hire a football czar?
Madden: I think he knows he should.
We all know he should.
So why get ahead of ourselves by saying keep Cable, we're building on something, etc. when we don't even have the proper executive personnel in place to establish a firm direction or vision?
If if you want a credible and qualified football czar in place, then the only way you get that type of guy is to give him the authority to implement clear plan.
Do you think a Bill Parcells would come in here and say, well, with a few tweaks, we're good to go?
Don't be silly.
Good take, H. Here's some predictions without the Al Davis histrionics.
I think Cable will be retained, but I think that Ted Tollner will be replaced with an OC who will call the plays in 2010.
JaMarcus Russell will be retained, but he will be forced to earn the starting spot against Bruce Gradkowski and Losman. Charlie Frye will be cut loose. Frye will prove to be a better QB coach than an NFL starting QB.
Bush will be groomed to be the #1 guy in the off season, with McFadden as the change of pace. McFadden will also be worked in more as a WR and also be tested on returns. Fargas will be used to run out the clock at the end of games.
DHB will be moved to slot man, with Murphy moving into DHB's WR slot and Schilens moving into Murphy's. We may wind up trading JLH.
I would consider attempting to move Huff over to corner, Branch to FS and Mitchell to SS.
Free agency focus this off season will be at the LB position and O-Line. Scott was a brilliant move at WILL. We need to find more stout run defense in the middle, and we'll likely move Morrison to SAM.
H -
"NYRaider... That's too gloomy."
Agreed! It's very gloomy!
"Father-in-Law of H will be 83 this year, still sharp as they come."
Is he available to manage the Raiders?
Realist - good point.
H -
"It’s kind of like Apollo XIII...."
It's very much like Appollo 13. We will probably survive it, but not before everything goes wrong that can go wrong.
We have yet to address the primary reason we're still in outter space and can't get home. We first need to identify the engineer that can direct us to safety.
Now that's funny: "We have yet to address the primary reason we're still in outer space and can't get home. We first need to identify the engineer that can direct us to safety."
H-
You mean as to why Javon Walker was a well-paid spectator this year? That's why its past imperative that Al gets a GM this offseason to give him the help he needs.
I'm nearly numb as to whether Cable should stay or go. On the plus side, the team plays hard for him, no question. On the negative, his playcalling leaves a lot to be desired(especially regarding Bush disappearing from the lineup for games at a time w/o being injured. Cable's background is as an O-line coach, yet Frye was knocked out of games twice behind this O-line. Like they said on BSG, "All of this has happened before, and will happen again."
Why I'd retain Cable. The first consideration is stability, which the Raiders haven't had in this decade. Cable needs to be allowed to run out his contract.
But stability is not the answer if the coach isn't any good. However, Cable had the chance to prove that his football philosophies work when he benched Russell in favor of Gradkowski. He's proven that he has both the temperament and the acumen for the job, but he likely needs some help with offensive design and play calling. It might be good to team him up with Marc Trestman if their philosophies are compatible.
Marshall should also be retained. He came up with some very good innovation, but he will need LB help in 2010. I think LB is the primary source of break out plays by opponents.
As for GM help, who knows. That's strictly up to Davis. If he gets it, it could come in the form of Jim Fassel. It is also possible that Fassel will replace Cable (not my choice or preference). But I think that if Cable is replaced it will be by one of these three: Jim Fassel, Kevin Gilbride, Marc Trestman (still a dark horse because he CAN still leave his current assignment - Jim Harbaugh).
Blanda-
If Cable is retained, would Trestman be interested in becoming the OC, or is he strictly looking to be a HC?
I think Trestman would be mainly interested in HC, but I think it would come down to a choice between being HC in Canada or OC in the NFL.
Take,
Not silly. Actually fairly realistic. I know what players are on the team, which ones performed and which ones stunk. I saw how the offense responded with a change at QB. I also know the owner and realize there is very little, if anything, I can do to influence him. So, I look for something go build on and move on.
Maybe John Madden can be that influence. He says Al Davis knows he should do it, so maybe it will happen.
NYRaider,
Naw, he’s too busy making suggestions to Bruce Allen. He’s a Sunburned Epidermis fan.
Me: “Now what we need is the engineer working with Ken Mattingly on the reentry procedure.”
You: “We first need to identify the engineer that can direct us to safety.”
Isn’t that basically what I said?
Blanda,
I think you are pretty close. But, we need help in FA for the O-Line. With what we have invested in young talent, I don’t think putting rookies out there is the answer. I might look at some later round picks for depth and development.
There is no argument that Davis needs help. But, if it happens, be it HC, GM or both, I don’t want someone coming in just to enhance his resume.
H
Moving to that OL/DL problem:
I looked at the CBS draft projections and saw 3 OTs and 3 DTs in the top 15. Over at BSPN it was two each. In both projections they had an ILB and a DE in the top 15 as well.
While we may not get Suh, there's some really good prospects to pick up the big uglies we need on both sides of the ball without any major reaches.
This, of course, presupposes that Al pays no attention to their 40 times...
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings
http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft
---Jeff
Arkansas,
I looked at those. BSPN is including underclassmen who haven't declared yet. CBS is not.
The CBS list doesn't inclued Rolando McClain and a couple of others that will alter the order when they declare.
If Terrance Cody is listed as only the 4th or 5th DT, then there is quite a bit of deptht there. He might fall to the second round under this scenerio, but I doubt it.
H
From bspn-
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4795402
AD will meet with staff next Monday.
Oh, by the way. From that mauling we took. The defense opened the second half (we were 4 down at that point) with three consecutive three and outs. Zero first downs in the third for the Crows, and we had closed to a single point.
The Russell threw the interception that was returned to the 28. Seven points off turnovers, the difference in the game.
H
In view of our luck at drafting declared Juniors over the last few years, I'd argue that the extra year of maturity really accounts for something. No underclassmen this year!
I'd go right along with that assessment, BR. I'd be nice if they were workaholics, too.
JMHSO
---Jeff
*It'd* be nice.
Dagnabbit.
But gimme a bonus for hitting 100!
;^)
---Jeff
Excuses, excuses. Blind faith. Round and round we go. The draft will have no effect on this team.
It's the refs dammit!!!
Cable says that he met with Davis, but didn't discuss job security. Cable did say that he exptects to be retained, but that changes will likely be made.
I'm sticking with my previous evaluation that Cable will stay, as well as the majority of the coaching staff. I think any chages will come at the OC position, and the OC will call plays next season. I don't expect that Tollner will be fired, but reassigned.
It just seems to me that after working all season with Davis, Cable must be able to get some read on him at this point. It seems like he'd be able to read the tea leaves. If his sense was that he would not be retained, he'd simply say to wait until Monday. Also, he'd want to get a jump on finding employment for next season, and a few teams are already looking for staffs.
I wonder if Davis would consider Ted Tollner as GM material? It's not a stretch. Tollner once ran the entire football program at USC.
JMac throws some pretty hard punches in this article:
http://www.insidebayarea.com/sports/ci_14115892
Since we don't have a first round draft pick next year I wouldn't mind the Raider going all in and trading up to get Suh. His run blocking ability, from what I have seen, is off the charts and is exactly what we need. He just has that "wow" factor, at least for me. Until we can stop the run, the Raiders will never be able to compete. Ever.
A couple of folks I personally do not want to see the Raiders drafting:
Dunlap
Tebow
Berry
Mays
Don't get me wrong, they are all amazing players and nothing against any of them, but the Raiders have got to address their lines.
The draft will have no effect on this team.
Don't say that, you take away all hope then.
:-(
toni, thats half of the posters at Raider Take mantra, take away all hope until Al passes away. you see they have lost hope and want you to be in that boat also. its the old misery loves company thing. if you have hope you'll be accused of enabeling and having blind faith. keep your hope Toni, you have plenty of company
frkyraider
We're suffering from too much hope and too little change. Give me change, and I'll give you hope.
I'm not asking for Al to sell the team or otherwise go away, I'm just expecting him (ie: HOPE-ing for him) to do the right thing.
Madden knows it's the right thing. We all know it's the right thing.
And the right thing isn't getting some retread or yes-man and giving him the GM title just for show. It's about hiring and empowering someone who can truly get the job done.
For that, I am hopeful.
What is so hopeful about the status quo?
Toni,
The Raiders do have a first round pick next year. It's 2011 that they don't.
I would personally like them to go after a MLB or OL. Kirk Morrison , and Cornell green are many of the players that need to be shown the exit door.
If Al wants to open up the checkbook again in free agency this off season, I'd suggest these two UFAs to focus on.
DeMeco Ryan - Inside LB
Marcus McNeill - LOT
McNeill is a no brainer, but might be hard to pry away from SD.
Ryan is in the Pro Bowl. If we could get him, we could move Morrison outside.
The chance that we could get either are pretty slim, but worth a shot.
I'm hopeful too. Of course, Al's loyalists love to build straw men in order to fit their paradigm, e.g. 'we'll never be satisfied no matter what Al does,' which doesn't reflect my history. I believe Al is capable of seeing the light as he did once within the last 20 years. He's due IMO. It might take a repeating season or two, but he will wake up. It's the yes-men around him that are prolonging this.
On that note, here's a proper take on the Raiders' current situation IMO:
-------
Monte Poole: Oakland Raiders far away from contending
http://tinyurl.com/yf85tam
-------
He describes the predictable rhetoric you hear from Al's loyalists on a year to year basis. How often have we heard that "we have the talent to turn a corner" over the last 20+ years? Amazing.
How does desperately wanting Al Davis to do the right thing the equivalent of hating Al Davis and wanting him gone?
What is so wrong about wanting the Raiders to do the right thing?
What is crazy about being skeptical of our chances if we don't do the right thing?
Questions the Straw Men cannot answer.
Take, re Status Quo.
It is easily argued that the Raiders have only four constants over the seven losing seasons: 1.) Inconsistency. 2.) Al Davis. 3.) Shane Lechler. 4.) Sebastian Janokowski.
I'm fully prepared to eliminate 3 and 4. There is little to suggest that there will be any change at 2.
However, 1 could be an extremely large factor. In fact, I suspect that might be the chief culprit. Yes, I realize that the man who makes the decisions is the one responsible for the inconsistency. But it's likely easier to change a man's current MO than it is to change the man himself.
Oh, boy...
Who's asking to change the man himself?
i agree with the sentiment to "do the right thing", weather that is or isn't in line with what some of you think should be done. and regaurdless if Al decides to not hire a GM, which i think most of us agree should be done, i still will have hope. even tho alot of you will say there is none to have and that we are hopeless unless this this and this happen. i will have hope, that doesn't make me an Al appologist or am i following blindly. this is MY team and i will always have hope for better things to come. i call it loyalty to my team. you will never hear (or read) me saying we are screwed until this this or this happen. unless of coarse the Raiders hire ME as GM. i'll leave the decisions to the people we enpower to do these things. weather that be Al or whoever he hires to do it. sure i have my opinions but i don't throw those out there as fact.
do i beleive that the Raiders can turn it around without doing the things you all or we all suggest. yes, i do. does that mean i would be happy with the "status quo". absolutely not. but just because i aint happy with it doesn't mean it couldn't work. Al has proven that point time and time again. just because it hasn't happened in the last 7 years doean't mean it can't work.
frkyraider
FRKY, that's a fair response, and one that doesn't put words in my mouth.
Still, I don't see us turning things around very swiftly or significantly if we don't do the right thing. How can Al Davis, at his age, keep pace with the demands of his jobs (owner, GM, scouting director, etc.)?
Remember, doing the right thing is simply doing what he's done to succeed in the past: rely on competent executive help on the football side of things.
frkyraider, you have just described yourself, according to many on this site, as an Al apologist and a dysfunction enabler. Welcome, brother.
Funny how no one wants to touch my questions.
ny
See what I mean, Im not too smart to tell you about facts but as you can see there's other guys here in the group more than willing to set it straight, no penalties and a close game to the end, no excuses our product is not as good as the team we were playing but we competed and we had a decent game, Jamarcus came in and made 2 terrible mistakes but even with the mistakes we were in the game until the final seconds.
h
it shouldn't matter who I am, I can tell you that just like you and everybody else in this blog, I want my team to win and if it means that Mr. Davis should retire than so be it, but I do hope that we get some help with the line and specially those 3 flukes we have as linebackers.
Anon -
If you're happy just keeping games “close,” that's you're prerogative. Sure, you want to win, we all want to win. Al Davis wants to win. That’s not the problem. The problem is how do we go about winning on a regular basis. There are mixed feelings here on how to solve that problem, but the facts are the facts, and they don’t lie.
Seven years of failure is pretty strong evidence that this team has no direction. A roster move here, new HC there, simply isn’t going to get it done.
Does anyone else have a feeling of deja vu?
RT said,
Remember, doing the right thing is simply doing what he's done to succeed in the past: rely on competent executive help on the football side of things.
can you tell me the last time this happened please.
frkyraider
We've had 13 losing seasons out of the last 20. The ONE constant? Ummm, you tell me.
Frky/mosh/ whoknows....WE ALL HOPE for wins. For chris sake, how long does it have to go on before you can say "it doesn't work"?
It is a PROVEN FACT that the method used by Al Davis DOESN'T WORK. You have NO ARGUMENT, it is proven fact. STFU and move on...so sick of the "crew"..look at this, one day after the final whistle and they can't wait to come on and start talking about the draft and how Al Davis still has it....these guys are either INSANE or they work for Alameda, take your pick.
Hoping is for LOSERS, we want progressive action towards a WINNER. You freakin idiots who continue to crawl up Al's backside is nothing short of PATHETIC. You go ahead and be a LOSER, a WINNER would want change, starting TODAY.
JONES
FRKY, the last time it happened was the last time we were good, when Bruce Allen was GM.
Before that, we had Ron Wolf as GM, who was instrumental in helping build our Super Bowl teams.
Al Davis is relying on less help than ever before, at the very time when he needs it more than ever.
It's not a defensible situation.
I never took frkyraider for an apologist Blanda. Another one of your straw men. Do you ever post without a local fallacy in your writing hand? Good grief.
you need to learn to read jones. or maybe just comprehend what you read. and stop stating your opinion as fact. or maybe learn what the word fact means.
frkyraider
You tell me what fact means freak/mosh/whoknows. It is a fact that the method used by Alameda today is a FAILURE. If you can't understyand what is factual, that is your problem, now go sit down with all your other aliase's and have a chat about that.
JONES
Ron Wolf would be an interesting choice to bring back. He was obviously very successful both with the Raiders and with Green Bay. Word is that he's interested in coming back to the NFL if the job is right for him. Given how old he is, he'd probably be looking at some part-time advisory position, but that would be an excellent starting point. He would bring immediate credibility to the organization, the kind of credibility that Al Davis no longer has unfortunately.
This just in:
New Oakland Raiders head coach Jim Zorn said: "I like this team, there's a lot of talented players here. I've always wanted to coach the Raiders. We're only a player or 2 away from being in the playoffs this season. JaMarcus Russel is a great quarterback ..."
:-0
XRaidersFan1971
RT,
i kinda thought thats what the answer would be. it was kind of a set up. i contend that bruce allen had actually little to no input on personel or coaching hires. he was a genious at working contracts and thats was his main job. i have to admit i still wish we had him for that reason alone. but to say bruce was "competent executive help on the football side of things." i would have to disagree. and that would make Al alone responsible for the gruden era and the success we had doing it his way. the same way he is doing it now.
when empowered to be the man making decisions on personel in TB how did bruce do?
now ron wolf was the last of the enpowered GM's we have ever had and i would be very interested in bringing him back if he would have us.
jones,
go look it up, i don't teach children with attitude problems. the name calling and ill-informed statements are making you look foolish. 'tis better to be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt. so shhhhhh. now go away son, the adults are talking.
frkyraider
and Rt i am not defending him, thus my opinion that he needs help at this stage of his life. i was the one who said being elite on any level is about not being outworked and that it wan't that tough for the other 31 teams to outwork Al with all of the tasks he has on his plate at this point in his life. but dispite my thinking that it still doesn't mean i could NOT work. i mean hey, i could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time nor the last.
frkyraider
Oh, boy, don't start bending spoons on me. When will it end?
Bruce Allen won the George Young Executive of The Year Award in 2002 for...twiddling his thumbs? Yes, he was a great cap manager, couldn't we use one after the Tommy Kelly, DeAngelo Hall, JaMarcus Russell, etc. contracts?
Are you telling me that it's defensible that Al Davis has less executive help than ever before at a time that he needs it more than ever before?
Allen's organizational architecture was essential in allowing for Gruden to administer his vision. Both of them kept Davis at bay without making Davis feel like he wasn't contributing. I would want the same out of a current GM.
spoon bending? hardly, Al Davis himself said bruce was not involved in player personel decisions in the last presser he had when it was suggested that he bring back bruce to be GM. and of coarse i assumed he had nothing to do with coaching hires. he was very very good at what he did. i didn't know about the award he recieved. good info. but that doesn't equate to him being responsible for every move does it?
RT said,
Are you telling me that it's defensible that Al Davis has less executive help than ever before at a time that he needs it more than ever before?
maybe you posted this before i said,
and Rt i am not defending him, thus my opinion that he needs help at this stage of his life. i was the one who said being elite on any level is about not being outworked and that it wan't that tough for the other 31 teams to outwork Al with all of the tasks he has on his plate at this point in his life. but dispite my thinking that it still doesn't mean i could NOT work. i mean hey, i could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time nor the last.
and are you telling me that it's impossible to turn this thing around doin it his way? i'm not asking is it unlikey, i'm asking if it's impossible.
frkyraider
frky, I think I owe you an apology because I'm totally in the hopeless camp. I don't think we can win or we are even close to winning, unless there are fundamental changes to the Raider's org chart.
I appreciate your optimism eventhough I don't share it at all. So thank you for the kind words.
:-)
For me, I had two epiphanies regarding the Raiders. The first was when Mr. Davis packed up his tent and moved the team to Los Angeles. The second was when Gruden was traded. From a logical perspective I understand both decisions, but as a fan? Not so much. So any good will or patience or belief that the Raider's are this close has long since dried up for me. It's not just the last 7 years... it's been the last 25. The Raider's Winning % since 1985 is .461.
As a Raider fan, I want more. As Managing General Partner, Mr. Davis has said he wants more. But until they get their business in order, nothing is going to change outside of that Winning % getting worse.
Wait? Al Davis said??? When has Al ever been known for honesty? Come on now. Gruden, Allen and Davis were all involved in personnel decisions. No one imagines a scenario where Al has no input. Instead, we imagine a scenario where Al is comfortable in having less input. That requires a GM, period.
Someone may have posted this before, but here's a good read from J-Mac about who deserves the blame for the state of the Raiders
http://www.insidebayarea.com/sports/ci_14115892
I don't mean to take the following excerpt out of context (he was discussing Ricky's-gate), but I thought it was funny because it won't be scoring Jerry any brownie points with The Man.
"For someone who has an aura so big, Davis can come off as very small."
FRKY, Impossible? Yes, if you're talking about keeping the same executive and organizational structure in place.
Oh, we might stumble upon .500 or something, but there's no way, at 80+, Al Davis can continue to wear all of these hats and attend to the details necessary to build a true champion. So yes, I'll put that in the impossible category.
Again, he has less help than ever before, at an age when he needs it more than ever before. So if that remains our status quo, then I don't see how it's possible for us to build a champion.
i can accept that RT. and it also gives me something to really root for if we do stick with the status quo. Big Al proving what RT and sooo many others thinks impossible is possible!!! should be fun!!!
frkyraider
you owe me nothing of the sort Toni. you are, as is everyone here entitled to your opinion. i have no problem with that as long as you are not stating it as fact, no problem. you choose to feel that way and i'll choose hope. fair enuff?
frkyraider
Toni -
I think good will is drying up fast around the Raider Nation. Just a hand full of believers left.
That whole "fool me once..." saying has been expanded into "ok, fool me seven times...."
Apparently, there's no shame in believing the same failed processes will produce different results.
For me, it's like watching someone trying to cut their wrists with a Twinkie.... They really don't want to commit suicide, but they're going through all the motions.
onandonandon,
ok, if you would like to call bruce taking the suggestions that Gruden made about personel to Al and then taking the reply from Al back to john, then yes he was involved. a GM in most organizations make those choices, thus being empowered, not in the Raiders org. he worked contracts, capoligist, and a very good one. he was also very good at being the go between for Al and Gruden. he kept them from killing each other, or from one quiting or firing the other!!!
frkyraider
I'd just prefer that he do the right thing. It's the right thing, after all.
What makes FACT Freak? Tell me, what would make it factual? PROOF, that makes fact's...the proof shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the way the Raiders are run, they will never have a winning record.
I thought "grown ups" knew how to spell? Just shows that you are "hoping" that you are a grown up. Freak, you don't have a clue, thus your "hoping". Sit down.
JONES
i'd prefer that also RT.
jones,
thats mearly your opinion, the fact that you say, "they will never have a winning record." proves nothing except that it's your opinion. if they stay status quo and went 9-7 next season what does that do to your "fact"? aw, never mind it's over your head. like i said, i don't teach children with attitude problems. grow up dude!!! quickly please. your drivel is getting tiresome.
frkyraider
See frky, we can find common ground there. This is why I want a legit GM with the type of organizational scaffolding that allows us to bring in a coaching staff that isn't hung up on pleasing Al 24/7.
Just wondering but should an everyday fan of any team in the NFL have to count on the impossible to enjoy a winning season?
Thanks but no thanks. There is such a thing as a proven formula. It isn't 100% foolproof but it has worked quite well in modern football times.
It isn't rocket science. It isn't spoon bending or pulling rabbit paws out yer arse. Here is the earth shaking, magical formula.
An owner hires a GM who he trusts to handle football operations.
A GM hires a HC he trusts to lead the 53 men on the field.
A HC hires a coaching staff that he trusts to implement his systems & schemes.
The owner, GM, and Head Coach work in partnership to reach 1 goal; win a SuperBowl.
Trust, authority, and eye on the prize ... something that has been sorely lacking.
ah, football franchise 101, like every other team but the Raiders eh CJ? tell me, just what was it that drew you to be a Raider fan CJ? just curious, since they are everything you are so disenchanted with.
now before you go all nuclear on me, let me just say that i am in no way shape or form questioning your fandom. just curious what drew you to them. i think we have all heard what you don't like about them. what was it about them that you did like?
frkyraider
Ron Wolf would be an interesting choice to bring back.
I know this is going to sound crazy but I really don't want anybody associated with past glory. I want a new GM and a new path to glory. But considering Mr. Davis' personality that is probably not going to happen.
I don't know much about the front office of any football team, but I've read that Tom Telesco, Colts director of player personnel and George Paton, Vikings director of player personnel are up and commers for a GM position.
Like I said, I don't know much about either other than the result on the field. Both would seem to be solid candidates for our next GM.
Of course, I doubt it will happen because I don't see substantive change on the horizon. Especially in the form of Mr. Davis giving up control.
Jerry Mac puts it all in perspective. Much like we all have at some point in time.
"The inescapable conclusion is that Al Davis is the man most responsible for the franchise being in such disrepair."
"He's the only common denominator not only for the last seven years, but since a return to Oakland that has been a failed experiment judging from a history of three winning seasons in 15 years."
"You'd think an owner with a passion for winning and an abiding love for all things silver and black would look to the person most responsible and take action. He's never tolerated that kind of performance from anyone else."
"But that would take looking in the mirror."
"Short of that, the annual blame game begins with Tom Cable."
Frykraider:
All that you've known about me is over the past few years where I have openly and honestly expressed my disappointment and frustration. My opinions are clearly stated on my 225 posts on my own blog covering the last 4 years.
If you must know, I was initially drawn to the Raiders by my uncle who lived in San Rafael in 1970 as a young 6 year old boy.
As a boy, my brothers and I visited my uncle on a regular basis. His passion for the Raiders struck me as odd and exciting. I couldn't quite put my finger on it but I knew there was something special and unique about my uncle's passion for the Raiders.
As I got older and started to follow the Raiders more closely, it just so happen to be in the glory years of the Raiders history and my formative years as a youth.
40 years later, I have continued to be an avid and loyal fan. However, as I've become older, I no longer felt the burden or obligation to be a blind Jim Jones kool aid drinker with his head in the sand. If the Raiders stink they stink. No more sugar plums and fairy dust for me.
The way that the past 7 years have gone and the decisions made by Davis has been a slap in the face to many Raider fans including myself.
I don't need success overnight but I do need to know that Davis is doing everything in his power to put winning as priority #1.
In our current setup, I feel that we are being run with 1 arm behind our back as a mom & pop shop from the 70's.
The way that Davis has conducted business the past few years (GM vacancy, ludicrous HC searches, draft whiffs, petty perhipheral issues) has been nothing short of negligent.
Now you know ... deal with it because what I'm finding is that more and more Raiders fans have reached their threshold with the funhouse.
Sure there is nothing concrete we can do about it but we certaintly aren't going to wait for the status quo to miraculously turn into "the impossible".
wonderfull back story CJ. right up to the point where you start to spit venom. i asked because i thought maybe thinking about what drew you to them may remind you how you fell for the Raiders as a child. i know that YOU know why, i just don't think you've had those feelings for quite a while. wanted to remind you of those warm fuzzy feelings you had sooo long long ago. and alltho i have been reading this blog and yours daily for quite a few years now i had never heard that story of your uncle's passion for all things Raider. i think i would like him.
not but a year or two ago you had much passion in your writing and a positive vibe. it was great to read amist the terrible things that were going on with the franchise. i miss that guy. oh what a couple of years of losing records will do to someones attitude. (yes i know it's been 7 years but i was speaking of your writing a couple years ago.) i understand, i don't share it, but i understand.
now i know. and i AM dealing with it.
just one more thing CJ, if you think that i am sitting here waiting for the status quo to miraculously turn into "the impossible", then you sir, are sadly mistaken. maybe go back and reread my posts to get a better idea of how i feel about MY Raiders. if thats what you think then you are wrong, dead wrong.
frkyraider
The big smell (MR.) gavis choketown faidas will continue to be nothing but funny entertainment, "j-busticus" will be back in the boss man position and he will still be over weight and out of shape, just enjoy baby. 0-16 in "10". State of the "nation" report from the great KarnaK.
Onodonodon,
“Of course, Al's loyalists love to build straw men in order to fit their paradigm”.
No straw men here. Many on the opposite side want Al Davis gone, no ifs, ands or buts.
As for Loyalist, yep, I like the guy, got a lot of admiration for him. I also believe he is just as frustrated as we are.
I also offer my criticisms and opinions. What I don’t do is stomp my feet and hold my breath ‘til I turn blue when he doesn’t do what I think should be done. I also don’t call people names when they don’t agree with me. One exception is anonymous posting, bile slinging morons. They don’t deserve any measure of respect.
Blanda,
I don’t think Demarco Ryans will get away for the Texicans. They will franchise him.
Looking at the current draft boards there is a long shot chance Terrance Cody will slip to the second round. Why, I don’t know, but when you are sitting at 24 with the experts, it could happen. If he did, it would be a no brainer. He’s a versatile guy who can play in a 3-4 or 4-3. He can also fill in at fullback or tight end in goal line situations. He’s also a bit of a comedian and jokester who keeps the locker room loose (he says he likes to help old people and volunteers part of his time by helping Coach Saban off the bus).
But, that would require him falling all the way to 40 and I don’t see it.
With the current rumors of Rick Leach swirling around, I say a resounding no. His offense is great in college, but, as seen with the Spurrier experiment, I don’t think it translates into the NFL. If this was a consideration I would hope Nnamdi and the other captains would request that meeting with Al to lobby against it. I would rather see Cable return. It might be a good thing to see what a Coach could actually accomplish in his third year. That was when it kicked in for Gruden.
Take,
RE your questions. Doing the right thing according to whom? You get five people in a room and you are likely to get five different versions of the right thing. The “right thing” is winning; it’s what we all want. How you get there is secondary.
At this point in time I would take the simple approach. 1. Keep Cable for some stability (keep players frustration to a minimum due to another change). 2. Concentrate on the O-Line and D-Line. 3. Find a young up and coming executive to help you and trust him.
That’s the right thing according to me. For others it would be Al Davis selling the team and moving to a nursing home.
JMNLHSO,
H
H -
“You get five people in a room and you are likely to get five different versions of the right thing.”
That’s probably true if you’re talking about healthcare reform. But we’re not. We’re talking about Davis hiring a GM, which is the consensus among the professional sports community, media, fans, and English- and Spanish-speaking populations of the World.
John Madden stated he believes Davis himself understands he needs help, and Davis said as much about a year and half ago.... yet here we are facing the same problems and the same failed solutions.
According to J-Mac, Gradkowski will go home “and relax, then begin intensive study.” He likes to watch film of Brees, Brady and Manning to see why they are so successful.
Give us a GM that can find a coaching staff and players with this mentality, and you will have your winner. The first person off your roster is JaMarcus Russell. It’s called, cutting your losses.
That time again, fellas.
8 is the magic number.
Was looking around at some mocks, and ran into this one. If this actually came to pass, I would nut my britches:
http://cdsdraft.com/mocks/member-mocks/index.php?id=7283
=moshbucket
Free Ricky's????
FREE RUSSELL!!!!!
If he were to restructure his contract close to the league minimum (which he already said he wouldn't), and we could make him QB#3, keep him. But other than that, cut the fat.
-moshbucket
Season's over, time to look at things to change and some suggestions to throw away with this team.
First, let me say, MIKE Leach (H, not Rick) will not be coming to Oaktown, nor should he. We are better off with Mike Martz coming here; same scheme as Mike Leach, but probably done better. Either way, it would never work here in Oakland because we give up too much pressure on the QB, and timing is everything with that scheme; just ask Kurt Warner.
Second, I don't think we need help on the D-Line. Keep who we have there with Seymour, Scott, Shaughnessy, Ellis, Richardson, Kelly, Warren, and Bryant. I think we need help at the LB position.
The D-Line did a fantastic job at filling the lanes and creating the gaps for the LBs to make the plays, but the LBs were 3 steps too slow. They do not know how to recognize the play coming to them, and that is Morrison's fault as MiLB. With the play of our CBs, Safeties, and Line this year; it is extremely evident that the LBs are the weakest link on this defense. You don't give up HUGE runs the way we did with a strong LB crew. We need to focus there defensively.
Third, Cable (if retained) needs to pass off the play-calling duties. I've been saying it for awhile now, and I won't rehash my reasoning. If you really want to know why, hit the back button, and read my "Guest Take".
Fourth, we need 2 Tackles and a RG on the O-Line; and a #1 WR (TO is a free agent) to help the "young WRs" develop. I mean, can you imagine Chaz and Louis Murphy under the someone like Larry Fitzgerald or Anquan Boldin?
But we all know that this is all mute as long as Al has the reigns. Again, I'm not going to rehash this; if you want to read my thoughts on this, hit the back button and read my "Guest Take."
NYRaider,
Which GM? Up and commer or established track record? Carte Blanch or shared responsibilities? Who comes in via FA and what are your targets in the draft?
I could probably come up with more given time, but even in the realm of GM's and personnell it's not a one size fits all. And five people would probably disagree on Who, what and how? I'm not just talking GM only.
Moshbucket,
100% agreed on Russell. That's as good a deal as he will get from another team if he is released. He has 3 million that is guaranteed for next year though, so the league minimum would be a fairly easy adjustment.
H
Nate,
Correction noted, I was babbling off the top of my head.
There was a Rick Leach, I think he played baseball or something like that.
H
Nate,
That's "moot" not "mute" (just kidding). It could be mute, as in falling on deaf ears or when I take my hearing aids out.
H
"RE your questions. Doing the right thing according to whom? You get five people in a room and you are likely to get five different versions of the right thing. The “right thing” is winning; it’s what we all want. How you get there is secondary."
Oh, H, don't be so coy.
According to Me, Blanda, Calico, NY, onandonandon, Frky, Nate, Arkansan, Jones, memdf, Toni, Duva, Realist, Mosh, Sarasota, Raider Rick, Raider Greg, Anon (all of them) and even Gary (sorry if I missed someone).
Show me one person here who hasn't agreed with me that Mr. Davis should get some football help at the executive level.
And this is a group where, if one person says blue, another says red.
Oh yeah, and John Madden. And everyone in the NFL. And the little green men on mars (trust me, I've talked to them).
To suggest that Al Davis doesn't need, and shouldn't get, help in the GM and scouting positions is the biggest bent spoon of all.
Sorry, that's just my take.
Take,
If you don't like coy, then be specific. You referenced the "right thing". What, is your definition of the right thing?
I say it's winning. Is getting a GM the only right thing? What if it doesn't work? Was it the right thing then?
If he brings in a GM you don't care for (say Fassel), is it then the "right thing"?
If he drafts the highest rated LT or DT in the draft and the guy doesn't pan out, is that then the "wrong thing" with fabulous hinesight or the right thing that just didn't work out?
So, are you saying a GM is the right thing and the only right thing?
I'm saying it would be a step in the right direction, but there are many more steps with several forks in the road along the way to consider.
Just saying "the right thing" is more in line with "coy". I gave three simple steps as "starting points" you said "do the right thing".
H
How more direct can I be? Look at the Madden quote. Should Mr. Davis hire a football czar? He knows he should.
That would be doing the right thing. It's the order of the day, the biggest need, our most gaping hole.
The right thing is getting competent executive help on the football side of things. We'll know it when we see it. I'm not crazy about Fassel, personally, but any tangible GM-type help would be a step in the right direction.
It's the right thing to do.
And so again, I ask:
How does desperately wanting Al Davis to do the right thing the equivalent of hating Al Davis and wanting him gone?
What is so wrong about wanting the Raiders to do the right thing?
What is crazy about being skeptical of our chances if we don't do the right thing?
Al Davis is getting less help than ever before, at a time when he needs it more than ever before. How is this defensible?
Still waiting for answers.
H -
"NY...Which GM? Up and commer or established track record? Carte Blanch or shared responsibilities? Who comes in via FA and what are your targets in the draft?"
The process is really quite simple. Identify the need (a GM) and begin searching and interviewing viable candidates. Whomever is hired for the job should be empowered. That said, any GM would be remiss not to listen to the wealth of knowledge that Davis offers, but in no way should that advise become a directive for the GM.
Regarding FA and the draft, that’s why we need a GM, like yesterday!
If you look at what's happening right now, this process is far from underway. If it was, Davis wouldn't need to meet with the coaching staff next week, accept to tell them they soon will be hearing from his new GM.
all right RT i'll take a swing at em.
#1- How does desperately wanting Al Davis to do the right thing the equivalent of hating Al Davis and wanting him gone?
if by the right thing you are speaking of is singularly aimed at getting a GM, then it's not. but you certainly can not deny that many poeple in this blog hate him and want him gone. but saying Al Davis should just "do the right thing" is very vague to say the least. i wish every decision he makes would be the "right" one. but then foresight is much more difficult than hindsight.
#2- What is so wrong about wanting the Raiders to do the right thing?
nothing, see answer above.
#3- What is crazy about being skeptical of our chances if we don't do the right thing?
being skeptical after going thru the emotional obstical coarse of the past 7 years is perfectly normal, not crazy but acceptable. but agian, the "right thing" is highly vague, so it's tough to answer your question the way it's worded.
#4- Al Davis is getting less help than ever before, at a time when he needs it more than ever before. How is this defensible?
it's not, pure and simple. my question back to you is, just who is defending it?
frkyraider
i should have added to my answer for #3, hell I'M skeptical about it too but that in no way shape or form will remove my HOPE. And i don't understand how it removes yours. doubt....skeptisism, understandable. no hope... hopeless, unacceptable to me.
frkyraider
Take,
Your quotes, not mine.
“I'd just prefer that he do the right thing. It's the right thing, after all.”
“How does desperately wanting Al Davis to do the right thing the equivalent of hating Al Davis and wanting him gone?
What is so wrong about wanting the Raiders to do the right thing?
What is crazy about being skeptical of our chances if we don't do the right thing?”
Is this replacing spoon bending and scissor running? Actually, it’s more in line with Al Davis who said, “I’d rather be right than consistent.”
I’m just asking which sequence of right things? There is, after all, more than one way to get from point A to point B, more than one way to skin a cat, and a few more idioms and colloquialisms we could use. We could also be arguing for the sake of argument, another well used idiom.
NYRaider,
“The process is really quite simple. Identify the need (a GM) and begin searching and interviewing viable candidates.”
And, would folks then be satisfied with whoever the final hire was? Or, do the complaints continue because it wasn’t the guy one wanted or the process didn’t take long enough and encompass enough candidates. As far as I know, Bruce Allen was the only interview for DC. Was that enough due diligence? Holmgren was the only interview with the Brownies and he didn't do so hot when he was running the whole show with the Seahags.
They also dumped Allen and Gruden in Tampa, that really worked out well. But, a guy dumped by Tampa is hired by DC with only one interview.
Anon,
It does matter. Come out of the shadows, embrace the light.
H
So there you have it, RT. Both you and nyraider state a position which has some similarities.
According to your recent posts, you are simply looking for "executive help." (Incidentally, both H and I have said the same.) But nyraider is talking about bringing in a GM and turning all decision making over to whomever that may be.
"The process is really quite simple. Identify the need (a GM) and begin searching and interviewing viable candidates. Whomever is hired for the job should be empowered. That said, any GM would be remiss not to listen to the wealth of knowledge that Davis offers, but in no way should that advise become a directive for the GM."
In other words, the GM has the final authority. Carried to its conclusion means, Al Davis out of the picture (other than as a figure head).
So, which is the "right thing?" Getting Al executive help or making him a figure head. I gather you'd find at least 3 different shades of this same opinion in between these two.
My own opinion. Al definitely needs someone who he can trust as his arms, legs and eyes. I have no trouble will Al's brain. But in the old days, Al's arms, legs and eyes informed his brain as to the needs of the team and he filled them. He also needs someone who is competent to take a position contrary to his, and be able to instruct Al as to the benefits of that position.
In other words, stated simply, Al's problem is that he no longer has the PHYSICAL capacity to carry out the duties required to construct a reasoned response to the teams problems.
With Al, it's simply NOT going to be a ONE SIZE FITS ALL solution. I also think that Cable comes close to filling some of the need because of his trust in Davis, and his ability to communicate with Davis.
Well said, FRKY.
I would say those who are defending it are those who don't have good answers to my questions.
You have good answers, so I don't include you in that category.
I think it's very clear what I mean about doing the right thing.
Yes, the term can be vague, but it can also be very specific when applied to something specific, such as getting executive help on the football side of things.
Getting executive help is the right thing to do.
It is also our most our most pressing need, in my opinion.
John Madden says we need it. He says Al knows he needs it.
So it's time to do the right thing.
To not do the right thing on this front is inexcusable.
There are other right things to do, but this is big one. It's the elephant in the room. It's the headline to the story. It's where change starts.
I feel like some folks here are just parsing words and trying to find wiggle room where there really isn't any.
No one disagrees with me, yet no one wants to agree with me. So spoons get bent.
IMO, part of the problem we have besides the players is that we have a coach that is trying to wear too many hats, and the old guy in charge of the team trying to wear too many hats.
Best case scenario for the quickest return to consistent playoff quality football (we ARE capable of it considering we beat playoff quality teams this year) Cable hires an OC he trusts and turns over play-calling duties to him, and Al hires a GM-type person with real authority to handle at least parts of the responsibilities and 80 year old man couldn't possibly handle by himself.
2nd best scenario is that Al hires a GM, gives him full authority, and he blows up the entire team and we start over from scratch... this might be the best LONG TERM solution, but almost certainly would be like a KC Chief-like team for a few years. Not very desirable after 7 years of losing.
3rd best scenario is the one I fear the most, Al doesn't hire a GM, he fires Cable, and hires a HC whose only job is to try and polish the 39 million dollar turd called JaMarcus Russell... while completely neglecting our offensive line again, and prolly making Kirk Morrison the highest fucking paid LB in league history.
[sigh]
That was painful to even type out... and I have to admit is a very real possibility.
Now that's a great take!
>>>
No one disagrees with me, yet no one wants to agree with me. So spoons get bent.
>>>
What are you asking for? Worship?
Tithing?
H -
"And, would folks then be satisfied with whoever the final hire was? Or, do the complaints continue because it wasn’t the guy one wanted or the process didn’t take long enough and encompass enough candidates."
First, let's at least begin the process. I think a lot of good will would come with any professional hire to empower a qualified GM. We all understand there are no guarantees in life.
For example, I don't entirely blame Davis for drafting Russell. We needed a franchise QB and Russell seemed like the right move at the right time.
We're driving on three wheels right now, and nobody's evening looking for a spare. Somebody should at least be checking tire sizes for a match.
No, just consistency and logic, although a tithe would be nice.
even gary, that is a good take. But I think, in spite of your misgivings, the first is probably the most likely. I'd be as disappointed as you in the third possibility. However I do think that Davis will take his time regarding executive help. Frankly I think he IS looking for someone he trusts enough to be his arms, legs and eyes.
But several of us here have refrained from identifying Davis as the ONLY problem in order to evaluate the "progress." Yes, there IS progress.
We can now pretty well identify the problem areas of the team, the personnel, the development process... A few years ago, none of us here really had any idea of where to begin. Because of Al's inability to make the rounds as he once did, the talent base was allowed to empty without suitable replacements and the team lost all sense of an identity.
A team identity is currently on the rise (thanks to Cable), we have a much stronger feeling of the weak links in the roster, etc.
I'd like to see Cable get an OC with play calling ability, get a little more help coaching running backs, wide receivers and the offensive line, and move forward.
The worst thing that could happen would be to fire Cable, bring in no executive help, and then focus on returning Russell to the starting position.
...any GM would be remiss not to listen to the wealth of knowledge that Davis offers, but in no way should that advise become a directive for the GM."
Blanda - "In other words, the GM has the final authority. Carried to its conclusion means, Al Davis out of the picture (other than as a figure head)."
I think it’s pretty clear that I’m not saying Davis is out of the picture. Davis should be an advisor, but let's not confuse that with the authoritarian role he now plays.
I think we should all be concerned that if and when a GM search is undertaken that conditions and ambiguity in the job offering may severely limit the GM role as well as potential candidates.
It’s time for clear and decisive action... and time to remove some of the fog that clouds this organization. Let’s start handing out job titles so people in the building know what the F they’re supposed to be doing.
"However I do think that Davis will take his time regarding executive help."
That's the understatement of a lifetime.
From a previous post:
“At this point in time I would take the simple approach. 1. Keep Cable for some stability (keep players frustration to a minimum due to another change). 2. Concentrate on the O-Line and D-Line. 3. Find a young up and coming executive to help you and trust him.”
Gary, the above is in line with your first scenario, but it seems it was ignored when discussing the specifics of “the right thing”. NYRaider said it’s simple, those three steps are about as simple a starting point as you can get.
But, in any equation there are variables. What you plug into the first variable has an effect on all the remaining variables.
So, here’s my question. If Davis hires a GM, no matter who it is, will folks take a “wait and see” attitude, or will they immediately start bashing Al Davis if he hires the first interview as did DC and the Brownies, or bash the choice because it’s not the guy “they” would have chosen? Or immediately go to the “puppet” argument?
There seems to be a lot of fickleness with some who only want Al Davis to do what they think should be done.
One additional item. I’m trying to figure out the argument that we need a veteran presence to help the receivers. They seemed to do just fine with competent quarterbacking. I think we need to work more on keeping the competent quarterbacks in an upright and locked position.
H
NYRaider,
"That’s probably true if you’re talking about healthcare reform."
So, you're saying there's only one way to build a winning franchise?
Just asking for clarification.
H
H said "So, here’s my question. If Davis hires a GM, no matter who it is, will folks take a “wait and see” attitude, or will they immediately start bashing Al Davis if he hires the first interview as did DC and the Brownies, or bash the choice because it’s not the guy “they” would have chosen? Or immediately go to the “puppet” argument?"
Who knows? It's like saying we need to draft well, but I can't really say what my reaction will be until it happens. If we draft DHB Part Two, then my take won't be favorable. If it looks like a solid pick, then my take will be favorable.
We all agree that Mr. Davis needs and should get help. I think most of us will be happy to see it in any form at this point.
H -
"So, you're saying there's only one way to build a winning franchise?"
Not sure where you get that from my statement... however, doesn't it usually start with a GM?
Going back to your statement about five people with five different opinions, I think you'd be hard pressed to find five people that believe Al Davis doesn't need GM help.
You can immediately take John Madden and Al Davis off that list.
Davis' inaction in this seventh year of epic failure would be criminal, IMSHO, because he knows he needs help (he said so last year), yet he refuses to get help.
Al Davis cannot be in the Picture, other than being a figurehead, the owner. If he is to maintain a role, that role will always turn into Al dominating it. You think Al would just give his imput and then back off? This is Al Davis we are writing about, he's either full in or full out.
As far as building a winning franchise...yes there are proven methods, and there are proven methods that don't work. One that won't work, is an 80 something yr old who dominates all aspects of a franchise. One that refuses or is unable to get someone/or more to turn the ship around. This method DOES NOT WORK. Anyone who still thinks it might or hopes it will, is just plain dumb.
It will take a complete change in method, partials won't work. Al has to admit to himself that this is the way to go...but, we know Al and the odds of that happening are very slim.
JONES
Thanks for clarifying your questions, Take. But this is what I expect will happen regarding a GM. You see, the thing is, I think he's been looking for the type of help he thinks he needs for the better part of last year's season and this one. He's not conducting a public search, and he won't, because he's not looking to fill a purely defined position within the NFL.
I think Madden's response to the help question was because Davis has told Madden that he's looking. He may have even approached Madden for the job - or at least asked for suggestions.
But I think that since Davis will conduct and conclude his search in private (for the most part), many will attack him for not looking (even though he is), for not following pre established "due diligence" practices, or for simply hiring who they contend is the "wrong" guy.
Also, it's far to early to conclude that DHB is a "bust." I give all comers three years on the NFL to establish themselves. A player has little control over where he was drafted. By a standard that says he IS a bust, then so was Nnamdi.
Say Al Davis hasn't been our GM.
Say it was someone else who'd held that role over the past several years.
Call him Hank, the Raiders GM.
Would you be advocating right now that we retain Hank in the GM role in 2010 in the wake of yet another failed season?
Be honest.
Will a GM come on board if Al Davis makes it clear that he will have partial responsibilities? It's the same reason why Al cannot hire a decent HC, a GOOD HC will want what Gru and Kiff wanted. We all know how that worked out.
No GM worth a shit will work for Al Davis if they know Al will have his usual dominating self budding in. It has to be a clean break, no if ands or buts.
JONES
I read in the media this morning that some season ticket holders are putting out the ultimatum that if Russell comes back, they will not renew. It’s getting ugly.
From a business standpoint, how long can Davis hold this franchise together by himself? Like seven out of eight local TV blackouts wasn’t enough?
Side note: Isn’t funny that when the Colts concede a game, they take out their starting QB and top WR. Conversely, the Raiders leave theirs in the game.
DHB is not a football player, his instincts or horrible and his football IQ is very low. His hands are small and he seems to have a hard time with basics when catching. It will be a miracle if he can turn his career around.
When drafting a player it is basic to know these things BEFORE you draft him. A WR in the top 10 needs to be an impact player or at least show signs of an impact player right away. DHB does not show any of these qualities. He was a very poor pick as was Russell. I know thats hard to figure out for someone who doesn't know much about the game..
Hey Blanda....what do you think of Al pulling the Pics at Ricky's...would really like to hear your take on that.
JONES
"Would you be advocating right now that we retain Hank in the GM role in 2010 in the wake of yet another failed season?"
Well... we're not dealing with your standard GM here. We're dealing with the owner. But if this season were the product of a GM hired last season, yes, he'd get another year, because I see tangible progress being made.
If your only measure of success is Ws, then you can't argue that there's been any change. But progress doesn't always manifest itself according to the season schedule. There is far more to evaluate. Any GM who would make decisions based solely on how many Ws we put on the board in one season wouldn't be a good GM over any distance of time.
That's part of the problem I had with Allen and Gruden.
You would retain a GM who has yet to notch more than five wins over several seasons?
If you lived in Detroit, you'd be defending Matt Millen.
Clarifying regarding Allen and Gruden.
There were many, and I even think that JMac might have been one of them, who theorized that the reason Allen and Gruden bailed had nothing to do with working with Al Davis. They both liked it fine.
But they both realized that they were about to lose their CORPS of players to retirement and no youth had been acquired or developed. Realizing that the Raiders were in for at least a few years of losing, they bolted for the team that had already been established in Tampa. However, that team slowly declined during the years Allen and Gruden were there, for the same reasons it did here - lack of developed youth, and reliance on players at the end of their careers.
Take,
Been there done that, we're getting repetitive. In your scenerio Hank ain't the owner.
NYRaider,
I said there was more than one way, that was your response.
H
Take, it really doesn't answer any questions to demote Al Davis to GM. You can't compare the owner to the GM even if the owner does the same functions. A GM can get fired on a whim, the owner cannot.
But if a GM had full authority in 2003, I'd have fired him by 2007, and I'd be working on the second one since the Super Bowl.
Then there's the Kiffin question. A GM never would have fired Kiffin in the middle of the season. But a GM would have waited until the following off season, which would have been worse. In other words, Davis was wrong to wait until mid-season to fire Kiffin, but he should have fired him in the prior off season. However, a GM would have worried about his reputation, and failed to remove Kiffin until he'd done demonstrably more damage.
NYRaider,
Besides, I didn't say they wouldn't agree on some things. But, GM is just part of the puzzle. We'er sitting here saying, "just do the right thing."
Even if you interview five GM candidates, they may have five different approaches. One may be a defense first guy, another an offense first. Which is the "right thing."
We toss around "the right thing" like it's intuitively obvious. This isn't deciding whether robbing the liquor store is the right thing or not. It's achieving a goal and deciding on which approach you feel is best.
Quite frankly, I don't feel like blowing things up and starting over again. Maybe it's time we slowed down instead of reaching for the C-4 in a kneejerk reaction.
Sometimes it takes a coach three or four years to turn a team around.
H
He's the owner AND GM.
I'm talking about his performance in the GM role.
So, Al Davis should go to the mirror and have a long heart to heart afterwhich he fires himself?
H
Sometimes the hair doesn't need to be split
Question to Madden:
Do you think Al Davis should hire a football czar?
Madden: I think he knows he should.
Hiring a football czar (GM, use your word for it) would be the right thing, and it should be our first order of business this offseason. Period. No word parsing or hair splitting required.
Are you just trying to intentionally confuse the situation?
Do the right thing.
H -
Are you trying to confuse the issue? I don't want to put words onto anyone else's keyboard, but I'm saying the "right thing" is to hire a GM.
"Even if you interview five GM candidates, they may have five different approaches."
That's wonderful! Bring them on. Let's weigh the options. That's what an owner (or board of directors) does when he interviews and ultimately hires a GM.
Now the process begins to take shape.
You beat me to the punch, RT
Okay, fine, so we can settle on what doing "the right thing" is.
Now here's a question for you. In view of Al's secretive ways, and his propensity to play his cards close to his vest, what makes you think he hasn't been pursuing the right thing since he first brought up the subject a year and a half ago? He just hasn't found the guy he wants yet. He's 80 years old, so he's going to want someone who can handle things when Davis is fully incapable - like dead. No matter how you want to compare the Raiders to other teams, they aren't like other teams - which is why most of us are here in the first place. A GM hire here, for the reasons and conditions I've stated, is not going to be like a GM hire any place else.
I guess the point I'm making regarding a GM is this. A GM hired here is probably going to start with significantly less authority than Davis has. But that will lead, eventually, to considerable more authority than Davis has (because Davis will no longer be functioning).
In other words, I don't think that Davis is only looking for help. I think he's looking for someone who can keep the ship stable after he hands it over to his son.
nicely said BR, you took the words right off my keyboard. he maybe interviewing someone as we speak. we would never know and will never know.
frkyraider
Post a Comment
<< Home