Warriors not Whiners
Rumors are swirling about a possible deal for the disgruntled Albert Haynesworth. Jerry McDonald today makes the case against Haynesworth, and I have to agree. McDonald lists Randy Moss and DeAngelo Hall as bad seeds who have burned the Raiders. I would include Javon Walker on that list.
It seems that any time we go out on a limb and get a high-profile player with known character issues, it blows up in our face. There's something about the Raiders environment that seems to aggravate and amplify character issues.
It's not that before or after these clowns join or leave the Raiders that they suddenly become saints. Hall is still mouthy and overrated, and the Patriots are finally starting to get a taste of the real Randy Moss. But in Oakland, we're lucky to get two or three performances out of these types before they leave town with hundred-dollar bills falling out of their pockets.
At the same time, the team will benefit from proven veteran talent at several key positions. I wasn't a fan of the Richard Seymour trade from the standpoint of value, but at least the guy shows up on Sunday and provides a strong veteran presence.
When it comes to future high-profile pickups, let's stick with warriors, not whiners. It can be a fine line. Was Anquan Boldin a whiner in Arizona? Maybe. But the dude is a warrior on the field, and I think that the Ravens made a smart moving in acquiring him. Randy Moss doesn't play as hard as Boldin when he's happy, let alone disgruntled.
So I wouldn't write a guy off just because he's having issues with his current team. What I'm looking for is character. Commitment. Guts. Determination.
Does that sound like Haynesworth to you? Me either.
It seems that any time we go out on a limb and get a high-profile player with known character issues, it blows up in our face. There's something about the Raiders environment that seems to aggravate and amplify character issues.
It's not that before or after these clowns join or leave the Raiders that they suddenly become saints. Hall is still mouthy and overrated, and the Patriots are finally starting to get a taste of the real Randy Moss. But in Oakland, we're lucky to get two or three performances out of these types before they leave town with hundred-dollar bills falling out of their pockets.
At the same time, the team will benefit from proven veteran talent at several key positions. I wasn't a fan of the Richard Seymour trade from the standpoint of value, but at least the guy shows up on Sunday and provides a strong veteran presence.
When it comes to future high-profile pickups, let's stick with warriors, not whiners. It can be a fine line. Was Anquan Boldin a whiner in Arizona? Maybe. But the dude is a warrior on the field, and I think that the Ravens made a smart moving in acquiring him. Randy Moss doesn't play as hard as Boldin when he's happy, let alone disgruntled.
So I wouldn't write a guy off just because he's having issues with his current team. What I'm looking for is character. Commitment. Guts. Determination.
Does that sound like Haynesworth to you? Me either.
posted by Raider Take at 7:45 AM
380 Comments:
These types of players need to come into a strong veteran presence team. If they are brought in to be leaders or do not have a standard that they need to live up to, froget about it. The reason why these players flop with the Raiders is because of no structure or leadership. This also applies to rookies and or draft choices. They need a strong presence of leadership to learn the ropes, when they don't have that, they become lost and lose direction. Raiders DESPERATELY need to establish that leadership, where will it come from?
JONES
Added to his character risk, Haynesworth is injury-prone.
The days are long gone when the Raiders could bring in a rebel player whose fallen out of favor with just about every NFL team, and find that player's resurgence.
Money has changed the NFL landscape, and losing has changed the Raiders landscape. Money and losing just make for an ugly combination that will test even the best character.
sorry to change topics folks but just a heads-up...everyone's fav is making a splash in the raider nation again...
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=chadiha_jeffri&id=5242011
forget about haynesworth al. we don't need another paycheck collecting cancer on this team.
Yes, and we were leading the way for McNabb, and several other players that didn't materalize.
I'm actually having a hard time coming up with a hot rumor this off season that turned out to be true.
We were supposed to give away the farm for McNabb, draft Bruce Campbell in the first round, and several others.
Haynesworth is not worth the price tag. He would probably want his contract renegotiated to get some more up front money.
We are moving in the right direction and have Seymour for leadership on the DL. No need for Haynesworth.
H
I think we all assume that Al Davis has come to his senses wrt signing another big money FA. It seems fair based on recent non-moves.
But maybe Davis simply ran low on funds to support such a player. Understandably, that can happen when you're signing top-10 draft picks with huge guaranteed contracts every year, as well as overpaying your own free agents.
For a while, it seemed like every time the Raiders signed a contract, it was precedent-setting in terms of dollar value.
The Raiders now face signing their draft picks, including another top-10 player. So, has the money simply run out for expensive FAs?
Hey look, somebody has to plug the middle against the run.
The Raiders didn't draft any DT's(Houston is going to DE). They didn't sign anyone. The ones they have aren't any good.
If they don't gamble on Haynesworth, then you're asking rookie Mclain to be Butkus x2.
You can't play it safe all the time. You have to take some chances sometimes.
The trick with these head cases is to win. Moss is fine when with a winner. On the Raiders, he got bored, and acted like a child.
Same with Haynesworth. Fine with Titans, sucking thumb with Skins.
If we have Haynesworth and get off to a 4-1 start, he'll be fine.
If we start 1-4, then yeah, he'll be a pain in the ass.
But I would take a chance on Haynesworth. Because without him, that hole in the middle of the D-line, will look like the grand canyon again.
Raider00,
The point I would disagree on is Cable just spent two seasons getting rid of all the head cases.
Why start over with a new one? What does thay tell the team. No prima donnas except for this guy.
We just hit June 1, so we may see if anyone else will be released. In prior seasons June 1, was significant because of the cap hit. This year might be different, but there still may be some solid pickups out there.
I'd like to see someone in the middle also, but I don't want anyone who is more disruptive in the locker room than on the field.
H
Seahawks cut RB LenDale White
Raider00...
Again I have to agree with your take/side of the story depending upon the price we give up to the "Skins"....
I don't give a rat's ass about the salary in an uncapped yr and I doubt Al does either...The real cost is what do we have if we go into another season without him and what future cost is there for what we have to give the "Skins" now...
Now after all the "Whining" on this board about how the Raiders' "DL" has been neglected and especially stopping the run I don't see how anyone of you could bash the opportunity to bring Hainsworth in now....But than you are that damn inconsistent!!!...
Oh! Ya! I forgot...We already have one Al stinking up the joint...
PantyRaider...Al's Al!!!!._
The National Football Post is reporting the Raiders have signed Joey Porter
Is this a rumor that comes true...
Joe Porter
Height: 5-10
Weight: 203
Age: 24
"CB"....
PantyRaider...Got Your Hearts Pumping Right!!!/_
I had to post this because of how rare an occurence it is. Read what Mel Kiper just wrote in his article for ESPN talking about the the AFC west Draft class, specifically Lamarr Houston:
Kiper: I'm honestly starting to think I really underrated this guy. I look at the measurables and in terms of combine tests, he's better almost across the board than Gerald McCoy. But that's just the athleticism. In terms of tackles for loss he also topped McCoy, playing a similar schedule in the Big 12. He has plenty of size at 6-3, 305 pounds to be a solid part of the Oakland 4-3. If this guy becomes a big impact player early in his career I'll no longer be surprised. As I look back at what he did, it's another reason to think I may have undersold what Oakland did in the draft. Houston could be a steal.”
Theres some news you CAN use!
Who cares what mel kiper says, news you can lose. The guy is NEVER right, so if he is saying that? I don't know why any of you keep quoting what this guy writes or that guy writes, they are all hacks, but somehow they become "experts".
JONES
H,
Didn't the Steelers win a SB with Rothlisberger & Holmes ?
Talk about head cases.
If Cable can't handle a head case or two, maybe he's in the wrong business.
And why is it better to have a "high character" guy that gets pushed around all game long ? Why is that better ?
The problem we had covering runs up the middle, I don't think was DT problem but a MLB problem. Our DTs are not supposed to break into the backfield on running plays, they are supposed to tie up the O-Lineman so the LBs can penetrate by shooting the gaps. Morrison didn't have the strength, size or instinct to do it.
Morrison was frequently unable to find the gaps on running plays and would find himself out of position. I remember watching a couple of plays where he was so completely turned around that the RB ran past his back while Morrison was facing in the wrong direction. That's why we went MLB in the draft and released Morrison.
Morrison was a "big heart" team player, but he was not the Raiders best MLB. Clark was better than Morrison.
Added...
I used to wonder why Morrison led the team in tackles. Then I realized he gets credit for a lot of assists which count for half a tackle.
Balanda...SHUT UP. The D-line is supposed to go after the ball carrier . That's there main objective, to blow up the play, TO TACKLE THE BALL CARRIER. He doesn't look across the line and tell himself "ok, I can tie up that guy and this guy" NO NO NO. It is in his mind to read the play, if it's a pass or run, to get by his blocker and make the play. You should write childrens books, you have quite the imagination.
JONES
Morrison led the team in tackles because the players around him weren't tackling. When your MLB and defensive backs make 80% of your tackles, you know the D-line isn't doing it's job. RB's blow through the dline and it's left to the safeties and MLB to get the job done. This is Al Davis defense. When you look at Raider success, the D-line dominates, if it doesn't, this defense won't work. Same with the offense, it is only a good offense when the O-line is above avg.....when was the last time we saw a dominate O-line? Maybe this is why it is hard for some to fathom the fact that the D-line and O-line is ignored in most drafts.
JONES
By the way Mr.Legal....how can you not know the difference between Bonus money and advanced salary? Are you just the girl that answers the phone? " Yes sir, I'll make sure he calls you back right away, thanks for calling"....sounds about right.
JONES
I agree with Jones. The importance of both the DLine and OLine in setting the table for both respective units should never be sold short. Look at ANY successful Raiders team in past history and I'm 100% certain that both the DLine and OLine were above average units with at least one of the lines being quite dominant and talented.
Of our projected starters, only Seymour and Gallery could be considered above average.
Derick Section 344...
Nice post...Happy to see some "Mediot"s already retracting their "Bad"....Remarkable...I don't believe I have ever seen such a thing from such ignorant types before....What is happening during the "Year Of The Cat"...
"CLAW"....My year...
"BR"...
What was it that made those "SD"
D"s work so well for so long...
"Say-Aou!"....
Not to mention "Mr Steroid" himself Shawne Merriman....
Who was Taylor and what did he do so special for the "Midgets"...
How some forget so soon or maybe never knew/understood to begin with...
Did the Raiders ever have great "LB"s....Huh!....Bet they can't remember back when...
PantyRaider...The "LB"s Job!!!/_
"CJ"...
Did those great Raider "D"s also have players like the "Stork" -n- Rod Martin...Matt Millen...
Not to mention several "CB"s -n- "S"s that come to mind...
I think if you took a real serious look at those old rosters you would see a talent balance between positions that complemented each other and that is what it takes to build a winner...Players playing off each other...
Not just a collection of talent with their own independent agendas...
PantyRaider...Add Albert And Maybe We Have That Talent Balance Again!!!/_
PantyRaider, you said:
"Not just a collection of talent with their own independent agendas..."
And in your next breath, you advocated trading for Haynesworth, a demonstrated "me" player.
I don't get it.
PR -
If you take a hard look at the rosters of past Raider teams that have been successful, it is as clear as day that both the OLine and DLine were above average units.
Running the football, pass protection, getting after the QB, and run D are the cornerstones of ANY successful team where the lines are the foundation of success.
John Matuszak
Charles Philyaw
Dave Rowe
Otis Sistrunk
Reggie Kinlaw
Howie Long
Dave Browning
Lyle Alzado
Sam Adams
John Parrella
Tony Bryant
Art Shell
Gene Upshaw
Dave Dalby
George Buehler
John Vella
Mickey Marvin
Henry Lawrence
Bruce E. Davis
Charley Hannah
Barry Sims
Mo Collins
Barret Robbins
Frank Middleton
Lincoln Kennedy
These are players that participated in Super Bowls and were apart of dominant lines.
"RT"...
Show me where "AH" was a selfish player and failed to help his team win while in Tenn...Show me where he laid down on his team in a game...
I'm aware he is older and has had a few injuries and he likes to run his mouth but have never heard he was lazy -or- not a team player when it was "GameTime"....
Now why would I advocate his acquisition...
Need/Talent/Run "D"/Motivation Sickness...
He would immediately lift the talents of everyone around him...Together with Seymour they would become one of the most dominate forces in the NFL...Add to them our apparent depth at "DE" and why would we not want him...Together they would raise the motivation of every other player on the team because they would now believe in our ability to win...
From the "O" to the "D" to the "ST"s and with talent also at the "QB" position we will become intermediately feared by all we face and that is well worth any perceived future cost...
He is but one man and NOT a "Collection of Talent" of which I spoke regarding our recent woes...He fits into a specific role that plugs a huge whole and forces every "O" to game plan for him and his partner Seymour...
Plus we still have rotational players at "DT" so they don't have to play every down in the game...
PantyRaider....What Dreams Are Made Of!!!/_
Nice Job "CJ"...
Now do as I suggested and post all the "LB"s who played in those "SB"s and add to them all those "CB"s-n-"S"s and than explain how your collection of talent on the "DL" could have been a force had it not been for the collection of talent playing behind them...
And may I remind you that during most of those "SB"s we were playing within a 3-4 scheme so had only 3 of those "DL"ers in the game at a time while we had 4 "LB"s and 4 "DB"s backing them up...
Now as for the "OL"s...Are you actually going to try and ignore who was "QB" as well as the talent we had at "WR"/"TE"/"RB"...
PantyRaider...Takes 2-3 Positions To "Tango" Successfully!!!/_
Al Davis defense is built around having 4 d-lineman, or 3 and a tweener like Ted H, that can get to the QB without help from blitzing. It is also built for the d-line needed to stuff the point of attack, not just dancing with other blockers, STUFFING the run. If this isn't happening, the LB's DB's get beaten up for having to stuff RB's that have a head of steam on them by the time they reach them to hit. It takes it's toll and wears down the defense, hence the late game collapses.
When the d-line is getting to the QB, the DB's can play up and crowd the wideouts. The inside backers can look run first which helps in getting to the hole quicker. If the D-line isn't getting to the QB, then a backer has to come in off coverage and it gets picked apart. An above avg to good D-line is needed for Al's scheme to work. the 3-4 was used with Ted H, he was a D-lineman who played like a LB, the original tweener. He was a monster. If the d-line is avg, the Raiders have no chance, it will be 150 yrd games for opposing RB's.
JONES
Panty Raider, search "Albert Haynesworth Selfish" and "Albert Haynesworth Lazy" and you will discover a treasure trove.
I still don't get it.
Peter King, while Haynesworth was still a Titan:
But I kept asking all weekend: "Who wants Haynesworth -- or, more appropriately, who's going to pony up for him?'' And I got the old "it only takes one'' answer a few times. But one coach told me the smartest thing, and this was a coach who has some interest in getting Haynesworth at the right price, which is about half of what Haynesworth is hoping to get. "Everybody I've asked this weekend says, 'We're out of that,' or 'I don't think you'll see us involved in Haynesworth.' ''
Sad, really, because he's a great football player, an impactful player who can change a game from the interior defensive line spot. The downer stuff about Haynesworth:
• He's never played a full season. He's started three, 11, 10, 14, 10, 12 and 14 in his seven seasons.
• He's never played more than 65 percent of the Titans' defensive snaps in a season. You might say a Nnamdi Asomugha is tremendously overpaid at $15-million a year (much more on him later in the column), but Asomugha or a quarterback is going to play 95 percent of his unit's plays in the course of a year, barring injury. Even if healthy, Haynesworth's going to come off the field a third of the time, minimum. So do you want to pay quarterback money to a player who never touches the ball and plays two-thirds of the snaps a franchise quarterback plays? It makes no sense.
• He's got a reputation for coasting on some plays.
• He'll be 28 on opening day. You want to pay a 335-pound guy who's never started more than 14 games and is entering his eighth year $13 million or $15 million a year? Good luck.
In the end, my guess is Snyder will pay up and grab him. He's the kind of trophy player Snyder would love to have, and the kind of player, if healthy, who will really help the Redskins close the gap on the Giants in the NFC East.
Now add in his sad tenure in D.C. Wow, sounds like a great guy to break the bank over. Not.
"RT"...
What did you say...
I saw he has been banged up at times and also noted that but where is the evidence that he laid down or didn't care...
I also noted he would have some depth to play with so he would not be needed for every down...
Now what evidence do you have to show he was NOT producing on the field which last time I looked that's where it matters most...
PantyRaider...To The Contrary You Posted Info He Is A Great Talent And Dominate Player...
WoW!....What A Total Moron...And He Posted With Such Authority Too...Petty He Doesn't Understand What He Reads -n- Paraphrases...
"TH" was a "DE" in college but converted to "LB" by Shula the 1st yr he was drafted and the only time he played "DE" in the pros was for a partial season in Madden's 1st..."Stand-Up DE"...Due to injuries on the "DL"...He spent 6 seasons as a "LB" prior to becoming a Raider and was already a "PB"er...
That was prior to Madden's switch to the 3-4 NOT during it... "TH" was a "Blitzing LB" NOT a "DE"...He lined up all over the field not on the line...He retired "83" and the Raiders in "89" switched back to the 4-3 under Shell I...
In that "83" "SB" it was a "LB" by the name of Rod Martin that picked off 3 "Int"s playing with "TH"...
The Raiders "D" continued to be good even without a "TH" type blitzing "LB"...It was our "O" that went south and made us a "500" team later on...
PantyRaider...Coach Pottied His Diaper Again!!!/_
"RT"...
Did you see this one...NO...It's too damn positive for you...
----------------------------------
Twice as a member of the Redskins, Haynesworth has been penalized with personal fouls while coming to the aid of a teammate. In a Sports Illustrated poll Haynesworth was voted by his fellow NFL players as the most dominant defender in the game.
----------------------------------
But of course you would just hate to have a player voice something like this as a Raider...
----------------------------------
After a 45-12 loss to the New York Giants in week 15 of the 2009 season, Haynesworth questioned the scheme of defensive coordinator Greg Blache, and stated that he could not "survive another season in this system if it stays the way it is."
----------------------------------
PantyRaider...Sounds Like A Team Player To me!!!/_
His contract has 6 yrs left and $9 mil guaranteed...What a bargain...
----------------------------------
An unrestricted free agent in the 2009 offseason, Haynesworth signed a seven-year, $100 million contract with the Washington Redskins on the first day of free agency, February 27, 2009. The deal is expected to pay Haynesworth $32 million in the first 13 months, includes $41 million guaranteed and could reach $115 million if all incentives are met.
The "Skins" will sell out cheap to get out from under that contract so he won't cast us much...
PantyRaider...Take The Hit And Let Him Hit The Bastards!!!/_
Hainsworth/Seymour...Houston/Scott
+ Depth
Bryant/Kelly...Richardson/Shaughnessy
1960..."MGP" History...
Valley and McGah purchased Osborne's interest, with Valley named as the managing general partner.
In 1963, Valley hired Al Davis, a former Chargers assistant coach, to be the head coach and GM of his Oakland team.
On July 25th, 1966, Al Davis returned to the Raiders as part owner. He bought a 10 percent share of the team for $18,000, and became the team's third general partner and head of football operations.
To Continue Reading...
http://www.silverandblackpride.com/2010/5/29/
1492726/raiders-history-101-courtesy-of
PantyRaider....Enjoy!!!/_
Report on Haynesworth below, yes, PantyRaider, sounds like a team player to me:
"It's safe to say that Haynesworth won't be earning the "leader" title any time soon. Haynesworth was the only Redskins player who didn’t show up to the team’s second voluntary mini-camp this past weekend.
Now, even Haynesworth’s teammates appear to have reached their limit. A Washington Post column by Mike Wise, in which he quoted numerous Redskins players as being critical of Haynesworth, may have opened Pandora's box in that regard.
There hasn't been this damning a profile of an NFL player in the media since SI's article about JaMarcus Russell's complete lack of work ethic.
"There is no room for negotiation at 4-12 [the Redskins’ 2009-10 record]," defensive end Phillip Daniels said. "I'm here, [London] Fletcher's here, everybody's here. He's got to understand that. We need him to come here, be here and show these young guys that the veterans have bought in and that we want to win games."
Veteran safety Reed Doughty added: "This is the type of game you have to buy in or get out. There's nothing I can really say to [Albert] except the more that we're here together, the more that we're working together—not just from a team standpoint but from a chemistry standpoint."
Raider00,
Rothlisberger was surrounded by veterans who started out with Cowher before he got there. Also, most of his mental gymnastics occurred off field. No stories about any locker room antics and “team” attitude. It looks like the more attention he got the worse he got off field. That doesn’t excuse what he did. If it was my daughter and the charges were true, I’d be doing everything I could to put his ass in jail.
There’s a big difference between “Characters” and “Character”. Ted, Fred, Snake, Otis, et al. The majority of those guys were characters, but they had character and were team first guys.
Blanda,
Morrison was more of a pursuit guy. McClain will take on the play head on, but has enough speed to get to the ball carrier if he bounces outside. He can shed the block and take on the ball carrier. But, not that many college teams use the traditional fullback now so there’s a adjustment to be made there.
We’ll know soon if your theory is correct.
Jonesy,
“SHUT UP”. Is that your answer to everything? So far you’ve asked everyone who disagrees with you to shut up. Do you stick your fingers in your ears and hum real loud when you read something from us.
You know, you could just start your own site and not allow comments, then you could be king of your own little world.
Now, if your statement is correct then why did Nick Saban talk so much about Terrence Cody taking care of the OL so the LB’s could make the play, and why is it that the DT’s rarely, if ever, lead the team in tackles.
In the SEC Championship game, Florida’s game plan was to double and triple team Cody, but when they did McClain was there and they had no answer for him.
If a nose tackle or a solid DT is good at his job, he occupies blockers and draws double teams which is supposed to leave someone free to make the tackle. He plugs the running lanes and if the ball carrier comes to him or he sheds the blocks, yeah he is supposed to make the play. They are not gauged on the number of tackles they make.
When Seymour was added to the line last season, their stats and efficiency went up.
On virtually every team the leading tackler is the MLB or an ILB in the 3-4. The second or third leading tackler is normally the SS because of his role in run support.
Calico,
Yes the DL is as important as the OL, as you said, “setting the table”. But if they draw a double team, they have done their job and it is then up to the LB’s and the Safety’s in run support to stop the ball carrier. They blow up the play, but do it by blowing up the OL and occupying blockers.
Cody made first team All American with some groups. He had a total of 12 solo tackles and 16 assist. Mr. Haynesworth’s highest tackle total in his career has been a whopping 41, last season he had 29 in 12 a massive 2.4 per game.
According to NFL.COM statistics, no DE, NT or DT cracked the top 100 in tackles in the league.
Tommie Kelley was ranked as the third (if I counted correctly) best DT in number of combined tackles and seventh in solo. Mr. All World Haynesworth had 30 solo to lead the Redskins line. Kelly’s (36 solo) average was 2.4 per game. Wow, same as Mr. Haynesworth. Kelly was actually amongst the top in the league in tackles by DT’s.
I'd love to see a super stout DT or NT type in the middle. But to say the LB leads the team in tackles because the DL is not making tackles is simply not accurate. Not a single DL position cracked the top 100 in tackles in the entire NFL. The top 100 were all LB’s and DB’s.
I guess Ray Lewis led the Ravens in tackles because the DL wasn't making tackles, which must be why they drafted a guy with only 12 solo tackles all last season.
H
Calico,
Also, take a look at the LB's and CB's on those teams. You'll find a ton of Pro-Bowlers and solid above average players.
You're only as strong as your weakest link. We've made major changes at LB and some additional help for the DL.
It's talent and how they mesh together as a unit.
H
The anti Haynesworth crowd has still not answered the question.
If not Haynesworth, then who ?
What high character, high impact DT's are available ?
Do you want to leave the middle of the D-line like it is ?
We know that won't work.
It's a good question, Raider 00, but it's not persuasive enough for me.
You could say the same thing about Terrell Owens. We need a veteran presence at receiver. If not T.O., then who?
Yes, DT is a "need."
But we are trying to build a winning culture based on a team mentality.
Veterans who can foster this culture and be an example for our young core of players are also a "need."
I don't think Haynesworth fills that particular need.
When your LB's and DB's are making 80% of the tackles, it means your D-line is letting those backs get through. When your best D-lineman is making an Avg 2 Tackles a game, sorry, ain't good enough. Lb's and DB's also make all the tackles on pass plays, this is understandable.
Vs the Raiders, teams were avg over 150 yrds/gm with a 4.5 yrd avg/carry on the ground. That is a very high number. Backs are getting through the D-line and are wearing down the LB's and DB's. IF, the Raiders had a good D-line, this would not be happening. The D-line is supposed to shoot the gaps and disrupt the play if they cannot make the tackle. It's not their job to dance with blockers. Al's defense is not built around the D-line dancing with blockers.
As far as Ted H, HE MADE THE 3-4 for the Raiders. He was a tweener before LT came around. Ted could play like a DE and a LB, that's what a TWEENER means pantywaste. Because of Ted, the Raiders had the luxury to bring him or someone else (LB or DB or Ted himself) as the 4th lineman on the rush. It confused other teams and gave the defense a big advantage. Bob Nelson, Matt Millen and Rod Martin were all great against the run. Alzado, Kinlaw who was outstanding at blowing up the line of scrimmage and Howie.. Do any of you remember the front 3 "tying up blockers"? HELL NO, the blew them up, anyone heard of Alzado saying" yeah, my job is to tie up the o-line so Matt and Bob can make the tackles = HELL NO. The D-line is supposed to shed blocks and blow up the play. If the D-line is not capable of this and is not pressuring the QB, Al's defense is ineffective, we have seen this since the last SB appearance. There has been little push at the QB and the RB's are passing through the d-line on almost every play.
JONES
Like I wrote, Haynesworth needs to go to a team that has the veterans to keep him in check. If he is brought to a young team who hasn't established that leadership to keep him in check...won't work.
JONES
Haynesworth is simply not cost-effective, and may end up being disruptive to team chemistry... something Davis doesn't believe in, but I think most of us agree.
Besides, if Haynesworth is on the sideline injured (which he is prone to), we'll have to find another DT anyway.
Most of us thought DT was addressed with our 2nd round draft pick. Houston has the size and physical tools to play the position he played his last year in college, but the Raiders seem to have found a greater need at DE...??
Haynesworth is too expensive, injury-prone and potentially disruptive to the team.
The other point I made previously is that it's possible Davis simply can't afford Haynesworth.
Jonesy,
Ok, then show us, oh mighty one, just how many DT's are making four to six tackles a game. Basically they don't exist.
Here's a description of a good NT,
“is able to occupy blockers and hold at the point of attack with good technique and leverage.”
This was a guy on a very good run defense. Number 6 in the league. He allowed Patrick Willis to become a tackling machine in run support.
The guy is considered one of the top FA’s this season. He’s a restricted FA. But, he wouldn’t fit your model since he only made 25 solo tackles last season and only 11 assist. He didn’t have as many solo tackles or assist as Kelly.
But, I guess it's not true because you didn't say it.
Kelly’s totals were 55 combined solo tackles and assist. That’s 3.4 per game and was third in the league for DT’s. So good luck finding that DT making 4-6 tackles a game. They’re not out there.
A good DT spends most of his time on run plays basically blocking for the LB's. On pass plays their job is to collapse the pocket. If they get the tackle or sack, it's a bonus.
Raider00,
Here’s a list of FA’s that could be put into the rotation without breaking the bank or having to put up with attitude problems. Tank Johnson has stayed out of trouble since his weapons thing.
Ryan Pickett could come in and do the job for a two or three years while we find out if Kellen Heard can be developed.
Ryan Pickett, Green Bay Packers(30)
Kendrick Clancy, New Orleans Saints(32)
Jason Ferguson, Miami Dolphins(35)
Tank Johnson, Cincinnati Bengals(28)
Fred Robbins, New York Giants(33)
H
"It's not their job to dance with blockers."
It's there primary function, especially in the middle. Hence the term "occupy blockers."
In run support, the LB's job is to shed single blockers and take on the play at the point of attack which is the line of scrimmage or behind it.
H
Alright pantywaste...you left yourself wide open...
"TH" was a "DE" in college but converted to "LB" by Shula the 1st yr he was drafted and the only time he played "DE" in the pros was for a partial season in Madden's 1st..."Stand-Up DE"...Due to injuries on the "DL"...He spent 6 seasons as a "LB" prior to becoming a Raider and was already a "PB"er...
That was prior to Madden's switch to the 3-4 NOT during it... "TH" was a "Blitzing LB" NOT a "DE"...He lined up all over the field not on the line...He retired "83" and the Raiders in "89" switched back to the 4-3 under Shell I..."
This is from 1987 vs the Browns, does this look like a 4-3 defense to you? 2 years before '89....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8eue0UZjL8&feature=related
or this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8eue0UZjL8&feature=related
oops..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVN-qW0j1Ho&feature=PlayList&p=C5A23960F9019A4C&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=17
Check this out, this is the year Ted H joined the Raiders and look what defense they were running pantywaste? It's a 3-4 with Ted as the tweener.....your copy and pasting from the wrong "mediots" pantyboy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhCYKI0R34Y&feature=related
More evidence of Ted's tweener position...he made the tweener, it wasn't LT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4AAID2DCHc&feature=related
There is more if you want to see it, pantywaste.
JONES
H...you are bringing up quotes from OTHER TEAMS, we are talking about Al Davis' defense here, stay on topic. We are also talking about the D-LINE IN GENERAL, not a run stuffing fat boy at DT. Look at how well terdel did at being a fat boy "dancing at the line". That's not Al's defense. Al likes his tackles to shoot gaps, to disrupt the play, not to do the tango with a center or guard. Stay on topic H, you are reaching way to hard, you might put your back out.
JONES
Albert does not want to play in a 3-4, period. Shanarat is going to run a 3-4. Albert wants out.
I think we actually do have fair vet leadership on the D-line now. The problem is the money. Not sure what the contract looks like longterm, but if it lightens up after this year, and Al doesn't mind spending the cash, I wouldn't be against signing him.
As far as DT's occupying blockers, that's one of the keys to Ray Lewis' success, and why they drafted Cody this year.
-moshbucket
Whether a DT is shooting the gap into the backfield to disrupt the play, occupying multiple blockers, or shedding blockers to make the play himself, the Raiders DT have not been "winning" the line of scrimmage.
Does anyone honestly believe that Bryant and Kelly are stout enough, talented enough, to win the war in the trenches? What the DLine has been sorely missing is a DT that doesn't get consistently pushed backwards and effectively eats up space to negate clear cut holes for the RB to slip through to get to the 2nd level.
H: I would sign up Tank Johnson in a heartbeat.
moshbucket...
I agree...From the looks of what I found on the $$$ the 1st yr was where the bulk of the money was spent and all that remains is a $9 mil guarantee with what amounts to a $14/15 Mil per yr salary...So that remaining "Guarantee" cash is swallowed up in his 2nd yr salary...2010...
----------------------------------
What a damn idiot...
The Raiders were in the 3-4 scheme from 1976-1989 when Shell I switched us back to a 4-3 scheme...
WoW!...Great Job of showing your stupidity COACH...
Your U-Tube Vid has a 5 man front -w- 2 "LB"s...The announcer says "Front Fore"...Now what the hell do you suppose he was talking about...#83 was playing "Stand-Up-DE" and a "LB" was up on the line #41...
You couldn't break down film if your life depended upon it you fake COACH....
PantyRaider...Dumber Than Dumb!!!/_
"CJ"...
On that note we agree sense you worded it that way and this is exactly why I for one would pimp "AH" and his contract...
He would be that man in the middle even if he only played 1st -n- 2nd dns and we had substitution on 3rd passing dns...If we could stop the run with Seymour-n-Hainsworth in the middle that would be huge and the "O" would have to attack our strength...The "DB"s so we get an opportunity for "TO"s...
PantyRaider...Fills Obvious Deficiency!!!/_
We have suffered from this shit long enough so maybe drastic measures are now very well welcomed by us...
PR -
You can keep bangin' your head against the wall but it would be foolish to sign Haynesworth. Cutting and pasting H's list ...
Ryan Pickett, Green Bay Packers(30)
Kendrick Clancy, NO Saints(32)
Jason Ferguson, Miami Dolphins(35)
Tank Johnson, Cincinnati Bengals(28)
Fred Robbins, New York Giants(33)
Why not sign one of these guys at 1/3 the cost? We need depth, size, and a solid 2-3 years out of an addition.
I don't like Haynesworth because he has a history of injury problems
and going sour when things are not going well or to his liking.
When Tennessee was a serious playoff contender and he was playing for his next big contract, he toed the line. When Washington struggled or changed coaches/systems, he has reverted to his true self ... a self-entitled "ME FIRST" guy who can't be relied upon.
If the Raiders were coming off a solid 8+ win season and on the cusp of playoffs, I might entertain the idea of bringing that 1 critical piece to the equation to get us over the hump and roll the dice. In today's circumstances, thanks but no thanks.
The DT free agent list posted (2x) above is a good one. Question is, will the Raiders pull that trigger?
There also has been a FA list of not less than 50 WR, most of which have been signed. But there are several that remain unsigned. For example:
Miles Austin
Laveranues Coles
Vincent Jackson
Muhsin Muhammad
Josh Reed
Kevin Curtis
Some are RFA. But there will be more, as teams release players and pare down rosters.
It's good to post these lists now. Because we don't want Gary telling us later that these deficiencies came as a big surprise to the Raiders, and they had no options.
"CJ"...
You are really funny...
You bash "AH" and praise "TJ" who has had legal problems as recently as "07" and still has 3 years left on his contract so he ain't even free...
By comparison "AH" has had one dissatisfaction season with the "Skins" and he is suddenly the "Bad Apple" but he showed up and played all season when healthy...He spoke out in week 15 not all season long...His non show for voluntary "OTA"s is the only big issue and it's voluntary...NOT even a mandatory camp...
As for the rest of your/"H"s list who is there that's an improvement over what we have...Is there a "PB"er in that list...Is there a dominate game changing player in that list...Hell our "UDFA" is a huge body if that's all you think we need so why worry when we have him...
And with the improvements we have made to the "D" and the "O" we may be just 1 -or- 2 players away from contention in the AFCW but your willing to sacrifice that after all your whining about the "DL" being neglected rather than roll the dice on a "PROVEN" winner..."PB"er...
In one breath you admit we have a huge deficiency and in the other you post anyone could fill that void...Now that there is some real "Spoon Bending"...Outrageously...Especially after most of our present "DT"s have been belittled on this board repeatedly...
Take another look at that list..
Ryan Pickett..Franchise Tag/2 1st rd picks for 9 yrs 8.5 sks
Kendrick Clancy 6'1" 305# URFA 10 yrs 0 sks
Jason Ferguson 6'3" 310# URFA 13 yrs 21.5 sks
Tank Johnson 6'3" 305# Under Contract 6 yrs 14 sks
Fred Robbins 6'4" 317 Under Contract 9 yrs 28.5 sks
NOT a single "PB" in the group and where is that huge dominate force in the middle...
Albert Haynesworth 6'6" 350# 28yrs old -n- 2 time "PB"er 8 yrs 28 sks
His only legal problems stem from a auto accident "06" and all the charges were thrown out of court...NO convictions and it was only a misdemeanor to boot...Hell...I have had a lot worst that that...Sounds like an angle from where I sit...
PantyRaider..It May Not Happen But I Pimp That Big Bad Bastard Anyday!!!/_
Ryan Pickett 6'2" 340# 9 yrs 8.5 sks ain't worth 2 1st rd picks to nobody...
Forgot to post his size...
"NYR"..
That's funny...That list only has 2 URFA's -w- one "Franchise Tag" RFA at a huge cost...
Jonesy,
I am on topic. You’re the guy shooting from the hip without anything to back it up. That was not a quote from a team it was a quote from a football analyst discussing the top free agents for 2010.
Specifically you stated the reason Morrison led the team in tackles was because the line wasn’t making tackles (try reading your own stuff). I point out that Kelly was one of the top DT’s in the league in tackles and your response is “stay on topic”. As each day passes you become more of a cliché . Your one note samba is way out of tune.
For DT’s there are two primary types. One is the pursuit type that shoots the gap, pursues whoever has the ball. They normally line up between the guard and tackle in the base defense. This is the Rod Coleman type. If they get through their gaps they will either make the tackle or push the play to one side or the other, where the DE, LB and sometimes the SS will make the play. Provided they are maintaining their assignments properly. This is the role Kelly seems best suited for.
The second type is the “run stuffer”. They will play between the center and guard and sometimes on top of the center. He rarely makes the tackle. His job as a “run stuffer” is to stuff the inside running lanes. He occupies space and blockers and forces the ball carrier into the area where the LB is supposed to make the play. If he does his job correctly he is dancing with two blockers and the really good ones will sometimes draw a triple team. He is to hold at the line of scrimmage or push his blockers back.
The run stuffer’s primary job is NOT to make the tackle. They leave the rest of the front seven one on one or possible someone is unblocked and they make the tackle, not the DT.
The last one we had in this role that was worth a flip was Grady Jackson. Ted Washington was ok, but was on the downside of his career. This is the inside tackle we are missing. Their roles are similar in both the 3-4 and 4-3.
On pass plays the tackles job is to collapse the pocket while staying in front of the QB so he can’t step up in the pocket. If they make the play fine, but normally it is the DE or LB that will make the play from the backside or blindside as they will be blocked one on one.
The DT’s will not be the top tacklers in the run defense. If you disagree then find a team where it is so.
Calico,
I see we are basically on the same page. I lean toward Tank Johnson or Ryan Pickett. The Cheeseheads have B. J. Raji and are trying to get him more into the lineup. Johnson and Pickett could also help in the development of Heard if he actually has the upside some are saying.
I think Johnson is playing in a 4-3 now. Pickett is in a 3-4, but I think the adjustment would be easier since the job is basically the same in both defenses.
Another thing that will help is if we have an offense that will add 4-5 minutes in time of possession to each game.
H
"The problem we had covering runs up the middle, I don't think was DT problem but a MLB problem. Our DTs are not supposed to break into the backfield on running plays"
H...this is the original point that your best buddy wrote. Now I know you stick up for your best buddy and all...my point was that this comment is wrong. The DT's are supposed to break up the play, not just be a dancing partner.
The MLB job is to avoid blocks, he should read the play and be at the point of attack BEFORE a blocker can engage him. If a blocker gets to him, he has failed, now he is at least 5 yrds back of the line of scrimmage and is making tackles too far from the line of scrimmage. How many times did you see Morrison 5-7 yrds back before he made contact with the RB? TOO MANY, he was not hitting the point of attack and he was engaging blockers all the time. He was catching blockers instead of avoiding them with speed and ability to identify the play. This is why Ray Lewis was so great, he could identify the play ( film work) get to the point of attack before he could be engaged and it would be one on one with the RB.
If a D-lineman is stood up and is dancing with an O-lineman, most likely he is being pushed back. It is the D-lineman's responsibilty to force the O-lineman to go against the flow of the play as you try to BLOW UP THE PLAY.
JONES
"H"...
Nice analysis Bro...I love it when a man steps up...
"CJ"...
We have our disagreements but time to talk vet to vet...It's more than just a game...It's real...And to those who have never been there they will never understand how real it gets...
9 month ago the the commander-n-chief brought in Seymour and told the ranks he would play along side them...He was seasoned...He was respected...He was feared...
Now there is talk of bringing in Hainsworth who is also seasoned...Respected...Feared...And the ranks will be told he will play along side them...
How do you suppose this will affect moral...How would you feel put in their position...They have been perinatal losers getting their asses kicked all over the field...Now the opportunity comes to have both Seymour-n-Hainsworth running point...Seasoned savvy vets...
For my money "AH" brings one hell of allot more to the table than just his 25 mins/game....More than his 28 sacks...More than his 350#s...
PantyRaider...Think You Have Been There -n- You Should Know!!!/_
Here is some film ...I don't see Raider DT's looking for lineman to tie up..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSEPlFjT6KI
http://www.nfl.com/videos/oakland-raiders/09000d5d8157b5d6/NFL-GameDay-Ravens-vs-Raiders-highlights
H, you live in a world of false realities. D-lineman do NOT look for other people to tie up. They are trying to break the flow and get to the ball carrier. Stop trying to be an BSPN anal ist, you obviously have never played the game and your copy and pasting does nothing to make you look like an expert. Tell your friend pantywaste to do the same. You guys and your plagiarism...is that how you got to graduate grade 10?
JONES
WoW!...Where is the understanding here???...
"PBS" not the "ZBS" that we play...
Run play: If the call is #2 the right side between "C"-n-"RG" the "C" is to push his defender left while the "RG" pushes his defender right to open a hole...The "FB" enters the hole to take on the "MLB"...If a "FB" is not used a "Pulling G" from the left fills the open hole and takes on the "MLB"...The "C"-n-"RG" are commanded to hold their blocks until the "RB" clears the line...
On this play the only reason the "MLB" is 5 yds down field is if he is pushed back by the "FB" or "LG" or he doesn't know how to read-n-react to the play and takes himself out of position...
It's now the responsibility of the "OLB" to pinch in and take up position in the hole while the "DE" holds containment on the outside and the other "OLB" closes the cut-back lane...
Passing downs: The "OL" is giving ground but trying to keep the defenders in front of them while they form a pocket...They are commanded to hold their blocks until the pass is thrown...The "OT"s push their defenders outside wide and the "G"s-n-"C" hold the interior in a controlled back-peddle...The scheme calls for a 3 -to- 7 step drop and the "OL" knows how much ground they can give up while still doing their jobs...
The only reason the "LB"s are deep is they are in zone pass coverage....
Play-Action: This is designed to fool the defenders...If they bite they think run and fill their gaps thus slowing down the pass rush...The "OL" power blocks initially before giving ground...
Now why the hell would the "LB"s be deep unless they smell the play-action pass...
Rarely do we see an "OL" dominate so decisively that the "DL" is pushed backwards 5 yrds down field which would result in an "OL" down field penalty...When the "FB" or "Pulling G" engage the "LB"s it's usually very close to the "LOS" not 5 yds deep...They may end up deeper if the "LB"s can't shed blocks and get pushed backwards...
PantyRaider...FootBall 101 Coach!!!/_
Hay JoneSuck...
Where's the comeback for your stupid vids you posted and failed to analyze properly...As in "Stand-Up DE" just like I posted #83 was playing...
Where is your proof that we were playing a 3-4 as you posted in "75"...
What's the matter...Can't step up to the plate COACH...
PantyRaider...TRUTH My Ass!!!/_
Talk about a punk who never entered the "Grid Iron"...
Prolley thinks it's a golf-club...
Still thinks a jock is a "NoseGuard"...
PantyRaider...Get That Damn Thing Off Your Face Stupid!!!/_
PR -
Our current DT depth chart is similar to our WR depth chart in that we have very few proven, experienced players.
Ryan Boschetti
Desmond Bryant
Chris Cooper
Kellen Heard
William Joseph
Tommy Kelly
Of these 6 DTs, only Kelly is experienced. The rest are either guys we've cut in the past (Boschetti, Cooper), roster fillers (Joseph), or major projects (Heard).
If the season started today, we would be looking at Bryant and Kelly as our 2 primary DTs. Neither player is stout at the point of attack. Bryant is clearly undersized at 290 to be a "run stuffer/space eater".
What we need is 1 additional solid, experienced DT to play next to Kelly AND provide much needed depth.
You asked about the list and made the comment about how there aren't any pro bowlers ... when your depth chart is as weak as our at DT, I would gladly take any of the guys on the list to upgrade this area of weakness.
You write,
"As for the rest of your/"H"s list who is there that's an improvement over what we have"
All of them
"Is there a "PB"er in that list"
No see comment above
"And with the improvements we have made to the "D" and the "O" we may be just 1 -or- 2 players away from contention in the AFCW"
If you think we are 1 player away you are only kidding yourself.
"but your willing to sacrifice that after all your whining about the "DL" being neglected rather than roll the dice on a "PROVEN" winner..."PB"er..."
Whining? No. Pointing out the obvious? Yes.
"In one breath you admit we have a huge deficiency and in the other you post anyone could fill that void...Now that there is some real "Spoon Bending"...Outrageously...Especially after most of our present "DT"s have been belittled on this board repeatedly..."
Spoon bending is convincing yourself that the DT depth chart listed above is adequate.
Spoon bending is acting like our run D has been a MAJOR problem area that past 7 seasons.
Hey panty, if you could put a sentence together that is understandable.... You talking about offensive assignments? That's well and fine, I think the topic is what the defense is doing to blow up the inside run. The MLB is trying to avoid engaging, angles, subtle moves to avoid the blocker and fill the hole. If the offense is engaging all the players they are designed to, then the defense is in trouble.
If a play is designed to double team a fat guy who wants to dance at the line of scrimmage, it is up to the MLB to avoid engagement and make the play. That d-lineman needs to blow up the design, NOT LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO TIE UP, that means he is reading the blocks and able to go against the momentum of the play. While doing this, he is also trying to get the ball carrier. No defensive play is designed for a d-lineman to dance with one or 2 blockers UNLESS in some pass plays. There are designed blitzes were a d-lineman will force an O-lineman to move to a certain area so the blitzing player has a lane to the QB.
JONES
"What a damn idiot...
The Raiders were in the 3-4 scheme from 1976-1989 when Shell I switched us back to a 4-3 scheme...
WoW!...Great Job of showing your stupidity COACH..."
I gave you a vid from a 1987 game. The Raiders were clearly playing a 4 man line...
"Your U-Tube Vid has a 5 man front -w- 2 "LB"s...The announcer says "Front Fore"...Now what the hell do you suppose he was talking about...#83 was playing "Stand-Up-DE" and a "LB" was up on the line #41..."
Ahhhhhh, a 5 man front with 2lb's.....hmmm, so that would be 5-2=3...3 D-lineman and a tweener, you know what that is don't you?, like LT, they rove around, they play off the line and up on the line depending on the situation. The base was 3-4, with Hendricks playing on the line during running situations and backing off on passing situations.
JONES
Hey Jonesy,
You're real big questioning everyone elses credentials, just what makes you such an expert. Besides hating Al Davis that is.
Calico and I are close to 100% agreement on the type of DT we need and their ability to occupy space and tie up blockers. Is he wrong too?
Just asking. He and I have been talkng about this for at least three years now. Turdell Sands was tried, but he was too tall and unflexible, couldn't get any leverage.
That may wind up being the same thing with Heard. He's listed at 6' 6".
Tell you what, you go first. Tell us your extensive football background that makes you such the expert. After all, you say it's not rocket science.
You got it in you.
H
"Calico and I are close to 100% agreement on the type of DT we need and their ability to occupy space and tie up blockers. Is he wrong too?"
So if you and Calico jumped off a bridge......look, the d-line of the Raiders doesn't dominate. Al Davis' defense needs a dominant front four for his defense to be effective. If that front 4 is avg, it won't work.
Balanda blamed the lack of run defense on the MLB and said it wasn't a DT problem. His boyfriend H has now chimed in and declares DT's are supposed to just tie up blockers so the MLB can take on another blocker and make the tackle at the point of attack. BOTH WRONG, it makes no sense..... DT's are to disrupt the flow, blow up the play and try to get the ball carrier. MLB is supposed to avoid engagement with a blocker and meet the RB at the point of attack. There is no dancing with blockers and taking on blockers so you have to shed them and then make a tackle 6-10 yrds back of the line of scrimmage. If you are engaging blockers just to engage, you will NEVER stop the run. All to often we see the DT's stood up and dancing with blockers and seeing the LB's pushed back 5 or 6 yrds.
Reggie Kinlaw, Otis Sistrunk, Howie Long, these guys NEVER just took on a blocker and held him up so someone else could make a tackle. These guys attacked and avoided blockers or threw them aside to force a RB to go where they didn't want to go = BLOWING UP THE PLAY. This is how Al's defense is effective. The Raiders DT's have been soft for 8 years, if you watch old film of the Raiders defense of the 90's and mid 80's, it will look very familar to last years and the year before.......you can also say that Al's defense needs shut down corner'S with hard hitting safeties. Domination has to be at almost all positions for his defense to be effective and it is one of the reasons why it is outdated.
JONES
tell you what H, stay on topic.... what's the matter, you can't find anymore copy and paste material? That's it, you are done? So now you want to attack me and ask for my credentials? TOO FUNNY. Get lost, stick with the topics at hand and don't weasel when it gets too hard for you.
You never played the game, you are a provoker and nothing more, your lame attempts of trying to discredit me are pathetic. What ever happened to "I don't take this stuff so serious, I don't get my ass in a coil" well, the way you are attacking me, seems like you want to take it seriously, ya think?
JONES
And another thing...thought the "crew" never read my posts, they couldn't be bothered....well looky looky, the "crew" is in full reading of JONES' posts....they (crew) lie and they lie.....just like those snakes called politicians, they use the same tactics too. DECEIT, skirting of the truth, misleading statements, false quotes, ahh yes, it is becoming oh so clear.
JONES
"CJ"..
A bit confused by your replays but I will try to get threw it...
#1) I say we still need help but the need is not just for another body but for a proven vet that can take on the responsibilities and motivate those around him to get better...To believe in themselves...
On that list 3 of the 5 would cost more than their worth...Their already under contract of have the "Franchise Tag"...One has noting in stats so I fail to see how he is an improvement over anything...10 yrs and has done absolutely nothing yet so why would you believe in him now...The other URFA has 13 yrs in the NFL and is at his end but was not much of a force during his time...21.5 sacks in 13 seasons is hardly anything to get excited about...
Ryan Pickett..Franchise Tag/2 1st rd picks for 9 yrs 8.5 sks
Kendrick Clancy 6'1" 305# URFA 10 yrs 0 sks
Jason Ferguson 6'3" 310# URFA 13 yrs 21.5 sks
Tank Johnson 6'3" 305# Under Contract 6 yrs 14 sks
Fred Robbins 6'4" 317 Under Contract 9 yrs 28.5 sks
#2) We have addressed virtually every position on that side of the ball except the "DT" with talented starters and respectable depth...We brought back our "DL" coach from the Gruden era...They are in their 2nd yr under this "DC"...Now why wouldn't I believe we could be one player away from competing in the AFCW just judging that "D"...
"O"...We have prolley fixed our long term deficiencies at the "QB" position and now have depth...We have talent -n- depth at "RB"..."TE" is solid -w- 2 starters...We have added talent -n- good size/athleticism to the "OL" while there remains a question or 2 that needs to be settled..."FB" remains a question as well as the "WR"s but we do have talent -n- depth -w- size/speed/athleticism while yet untested/unproven but that's quite different than being deficient as with the "DL"...
That "DL" has been proven deficient over time and needs to be addresses with more than just a "Band-Aid" to slow the bleeding...It remains our most glaring weakness...Period...
PantyRaider...One Player For Certain!!!/_
"JoneAss"...
Well I just decided to show how stupid you are and it's so damn easy...So if you find one vid that looks like there was a 4 man front that means they played the 4-3...Now how freaking stupid is that...Ever hear of situational substitution or using multiple schemes...Like on 3rd -n- long going to the Nickle-n-Dime or the prevent...And NO they were not playing a 5-2-4 scheme but at times would move a "LB" up on the line in a Stand-Up position...And NO #83 was NOT playing as a "LB" on passing downs...He was playing "Stand-Up DE" just as Madden said he was until the team switched to the 3-4 the following yr...And that yr was "83"s worst as stats and he didn't play well as a "DE" as shown by Franco's easy "TD"...And stupid...The "OL" play decides how the "DT"s are handled and it's NOT by the design of the "D"...The "OL" blocks to tie them up and inhibit their pursuit to the "QB" -n- "RB"s so your stupidity arguing about the "DT"s job to "Dance With Blockers" is absolutely hilarious and it very damn obvious you don't have the slightest glue as to how this game is played...
Look...I will give you some help here although you don't deserve it and haven't earned it in the least...Go to a salvage sale and get back you old "Attari" and go threw the formations very slowly as the play develops and see how each man blocks his defender...Maybe later you can view it on a "PS1" but your in no way intelligent enough yet to advance to "Madden 05" on that "PS2" and NO keep your damn thumbs off that "PS3" or "XBOX" because their light years ahead of where you will ever be...
PantyRaider..Dumb-n-Dumber-n-Stupid Ta Boot!!!/_
PR - I agree with you about our DTs being one of our most glaring weakness but I don't subscribe to shelling out big dollars to an injury prone player with a bad attitude.
Question for you ... why do you list the DTs sack numbers? It is a meaningless stat for a DT and the topic at hand. The topic at hand, in case your forgot, is strengthening our interior RUN defense.
The guys listed by H are just a cursory list. My point was very simple so please read carefully and don't get things twisted:
The Raiders need to add 1 additional DT who is stout at the point of attack and is an experienced player who is proven to be good against the run. Is that so difficult to comprehend?
You want to put all your eggs in the Hanyneworth basket as if he is the only DT to go after. Wrong. We don't need a high priced pro bowl player to upgrade this position. Former pro bowl players come at a very steep cost. Otherwise the player would not be available unless the player is hurt or has serious baggage.
For both the WR corps and DT depth chart, adding 1 solid vet is the sensible thing to do when it is quite obvious we are 1 injury away from being up shit creek. We don't need to flush money down the toilet on a T.O. or Haynesworth. There is and will be plenty of opportunities to find the type of players where we don't break the bank but still add a proven player to strengthen our depth charts.
"JoneAss"...
Here you can argue all you want with this site as the history of our starting unit on both sides of the ball...
http://www.pro-football-reference.
com/teams/rai/1987_roster.htm
Now it doesn't say 3-4 but you may be able to decipher that from the names of the starting positions and how many starting "LB"s are listed and the names of each "LB" position...
WoW!....Do we really have to make it that simple for you to understand this game....Maybe it is "Quantum Mechanics" from your "Peanuts" standpoint...
Now here is "88"...
http://www.pro-football-reference.
com/teams/rai/1988_roster.htm
"89"....
http://www.pro-football-reference.
com/teams/rai/1989_roster.htm
Compare "90"...Under Shell I's 1st full season as "HC"....
http://www.pro-football-reference.
com/teams/rai/1990_roster.htm
Now this is where I'm going to lose you to the depth of your stupidity...
At times we would add a "LDE" and remove an "OLB" and perhaps play the other "OLB" up on the line leaving only the 2 "ILB"s in formation...This is why we have more than one "LDE" listed as starters...So now get a grip on yourself because this was Al Davis' "DC" employing a "Hi-Bred" "D"....And you said he was limited to some archaic schemes...
Now go back in the corner and suck your thumbs...COACH...
NOW YOU HAVE THE TRUTH....
PantyRaider...Why Is This So Damn Easy...Can He Really Be This Damn Dumb Or Is it Just An Act!!!/_
"CJ"....
Here is where we disagree...
You are viewing it only from the standpoint of the "Run D" while I'm viewing it from the standpoint of a base starter at "DT" who is both stout against the run and stout as well in the passing game...Added to that is the motivation extended to his teammates and the belief that they can compete/win...
This adds up to his total value which non of the others listed posses or can deliver on as it appears today and why he and he alone is worth the price in my estimation...
So we agree help is needed and it's a bigger need than some perceive but disagree at what level of help is required and what cost is reasonable...
So you evidently believe this unit is closer to competing than I do...You post an addition in run support is all that's needed while I think we need a base starter who is a dominate player in the passing game as well as against the run...
PantyRaider....Not Very Far Apart!!!/_
"TOO FUNNY. Get lost, stick with the topics at hand and don't weasel when it gets too hard for you."
Standard Jonesy answer. The topic at hand is how do we improve on the DL when it comes to run defense. Not Jones' hatred for Al Davis (There's that one note samba again)
No weaseling here. Seems a bit hard for you though. Can't seem to come up with anything except "Shut up" and "Al Davis."
You seem to be the one who wants to get into manhood measuring. Telling everyone to shut up, get lost, etc., etc. Wanting to know if they ever played the game. You started the credentialling debate, not me. So I figure you must have been All State, or All Conference.
Maybe next time I'll Double Dog Dare you.
Hell, Mike Leach and Paul Johnson never played college football. Seems they have done pretty well.
I guess under your standards they shouldn't be coaching and if someone hasn't played a sport they shouldn't comment on the sport.
Telling people to shut up isn't an answer. It's an infantile reaction by people who normally have nothing constructive to add to the debate.
If my post make so much smoke come out of your ears, you don't have to read them. Wouldn't want you to get an ulcer or run your blood pressure up.
Oh yeah. Would I jump off a bridge with Calico? If it were a railroad bridge and a train were coming. Yep. Especially if it were over a river. Now, that would be fun. Used to do it as a kid.
Calico,
John Henderson is still out there also. Went to the Pro Bowl with Jacksonville, but has had a run in with Del Rio and is rumored to have shoulder problems. Could be a cheap camp invitee, amongst others, to see what he had left at 31, and if the attitude/injury things are true. Wouldn't cost a draft choice or any reworking of a contract.
I agree, sacks for a stout run stuffing DT are meaningless. A bonus at best.
Sapp was lousy against the run but he is considered HOF because of his sack totals. And, he never missed an opportunity to quote them to you. He was never bugged about our record when he was on the team. What bothered him most was getting 10 sacks and not making the Pro Bowl.
H
"H"...
Your correct if pimping a one dimensional "DT" for run support only but when is he in the game...
Usually 1st -n- 2nd dns are considered run dns but that depends on the "O" that we're facing...So if matched against a team like "Indy" which we will be later or "SD" twice a season or the "Donko"s twice who love to throw the ball what advantage would there be in having a one dimensional run stuffing "DT" who fails to get after the "QB"...
Maybe in a short yardage situation or at the goal line but between the 20's...I just don't get it or see the value...
On the "That's Funny" note...
The TRUTH posted..."His boyfriend H" while he has an obvious "Man-Crush" on "RT" holding onto his shirt tail talking about how before "RT" was a jerk and supported the "Crew" before he wised up and started supporting "JoneAss" bashin Al...Now that is way too funny...
PantyRaider...Can't Believe I'm On this Front Pouch In A Swing Just A Swingin...Just A Swingin!!!/_
Please read this:
http://tinyurl.com/3xj9t2q
The blog post (linked above) clearly, yet simply, explains the reasons for cautious optimism.
The post could have been titled by this quote:
"Is this finally the year that it will work?"
There is a little something in it for everyone on this board.
Tip: Try not to see only what serves your viewpoint.
NYRaider,
My lone exception with this has nothing to do with my view point.
The following quote:
"Campbell is far from a great player. He quarterbacked a 4-12 team last year and was cast aside this offseason by new Redskins coach and noted quarterback guru Mike Shanahan."
Noted quarterback guru?
Let's see, he inherited John Elway, then there was the Fab Three, Jake Plumber, Brian Griese, and Jay Cutler. Cutler may still become a good quarterback, but it won't be under Shannahan.
Other than that, it was well balanced. The glass remains at 73.1%, but could go up.
I do think Lammar Houston will be a bigger impact than folks think. Especially after the first four games or so. I rewatched the BCS game and Alabama's game plan was to run to the opposite side he was on, and to double team. On occasion he did line up outside depending on the formation.
Speed, quickness and strength. Good combination for a DE.
H
"The topic at hand is how do we improve on the DL when it comes to run defense. Not Jones' hatred for Al Davis (There's that one note samba again)"
No, the topic is from Balanda, he said that the run defense wasn't any fault of the DT's, he said it was from poor MLB play. THIS IS WHY I WROTE SHUT UP because it is completely insane like most of his ramblings. I told you to get lost because you told me to give you my "credentials".
The only part of my argument about Al Davis is, IT'S HIS DEFENSE. So once again H, your misdirection is a JOKE. You are trying to paint a picture that isn't true. I am explaining what the defense needs to be effective, you don't agree. But, in your insecurity, you attack me instead of what I write because you have run out of copy and paste material. CASE CLOSED
JONES
Pantywaste, is your "wife" out of her training bra yet? Just because you are a sick pervert, don't take it out on me. As far as a "mancrush" on RT..hardly, sounds like you are a bit jealous huh, maybe you need a few more sessions with your therapist, good luck.
JONES
NYR -
Thanks for the link. This paints an even-handed, balanced, and realistic viewpoint.
IMO, Jason Campbell, Rolondo McClain, and Lamar Houston will ALL need to make a significant impact to get us over the hump.
H -
You seem to look past the facts to trash Shanahan (which is irrelevant). Fact is, Campbell QB'd a 4-12 team last year, and has never been a standout QB.
This does not bode well for a Raiders team with inexperienced WRs and a patchwork O-line.
However, I still believe Campbell is an improvement. Although, he should have Gradkowski breathing down his back in what I hope will still be an open competition.
Jonesy,
“No, the topic is from Balanda, he said that the run defense wasn't any fault of the DT's, he said it was from poor MLB play.”
That’s your topic and Blanda’s opinion. Not my topic. Argue that one out with him.
Mine is how to improve the DL in run defense. Heck, Blanda might be right. Time will tell.
I say we still need a solid stout run stuffer who can get leverage, occupy space and tie up blockers to clog the inside running lanes so the LB’s, DE’s and SS’s can make the play. You know, if the OL invites them to dance, well make sure you have two partners.
NYRaider,
I saw the facts. Look back at my Guest Take. I said many of the same things the article said, which was about reason for optimism.
My point is Shannarat has lived off his reputation for building great QB’s based primarily on his time with Elway. Besides, as a true Raider fan I have to take a shot at Shanahan. It’s a genetic disorder.
Without Elway he’s done basically not much. Aside from that it was a great article. Actually, Shanahan probably is hoping to relive the Elway Days with a veteran Pro Bowl QB who has been to the Super Bowl but not won. It might even work. But they got basically zip in the draft to help McNabb.
Yes, Campbell had a 4-12 record, but he put up good numbers. His red zone rating was around 110 with zero interceptions. He did his part for the team.
We had a 5-11 record with the worst QB play in the league for the first 9 games. Sounds to me like a good merger, reason for optimism. I believe that was the point of the article.
My opinion is we had a much better off season than did Washington. Could be wrong, but that’s my opinion. And, I think that was also the point of the article.
H
Quick hit:
Saw a rumor that Mel Kiper has reassesed his draft board. He has moved Rolando McClain up to the top five with an equilivance equal to Gerald McCoy who was taken at #3.
But, the article said you had to be an Insider to see Kipher's rework. Not gonna do it.
H
"H"....
He also moved Houston up according to what was reported in the Tribune...Saying he was equal or better than McCoy on stats/production/athleticism/talent...
The "Rat"...
His reputation was build off of being "OC" at "SadFran" and his return to Elways' "Donko"s when he was a seasoned vet having been the "OC" there early on with Elway...Don't remember if it was Young or Montana who was in "SadFran" at the time...Hardly something he should get credit for because these were already veteran productive "QB"s before he entered the picture...
He has done nothing sense...
"JoneAss"...
You can't escape that easily...Now you blew your wad so go wash your hands and explain what the hell your talking about claiming what you saw in those vids you posted as being a 4-3 "D" when clearly the Raiders ran the 3-4 from "76" until sometime during the "89" season after Shell I took over as "Interim HC"...
Come on Bitch...Man-Up...Where is your proof...You opened your big damn mouth now stop running from the TRUTH....Face it like a real man instead of the Bitch that you are...Liar...
PantyRaider...Laughin @ Stupidity Proclaiming "I Have The TRUTH"!!!!/_
A Note On "JC"...
So what if the team he was on had a 4-12 record if his personal play/stats were exultant considering his circumstances...
Gannon was a back-up "QB" on a 7-9 team in 1998 as a "Squaw" but came to the Raiders and was the productive leader of a winning football team...So by that prior annalists we never should have gone after Gannon...
Hay "JoneAss"....
Still waiting...Where is your TRUTH Coach...
WoW!....That was THE worstest job of breaking down film on record...
PantyRaider...And He Thinks He's A Coach!!!/_
Anonymous JONES said...
Alright pantywaste...you left yourself wide open...
(Followed by the worst film break-down on record) by "I Have The TRUTH"....
There is more if you want to see it, pantywaste.
JONES
-----------------------------------
OK Bitch!!!...Come on Bring-It Bitch!!!...
PantyRaider...Ha! Ha! Ha!....Can't Stop Laughin @ Such Total Absolute Stupidity COACH!!!/_
"NYR"...
The article you posted is interesting but he likes to inject little things that are just not true such as the following...
---------------------------------
Oakland’s only major acquisition of 2010 who could make an immediate impact was middle linebacker Rolando McClain.
----------------------------------
Now even "Nipple" is posting that Houston may be the steel of the draft and possible immediate impact player...On top of that last season an "UDFA" "WR" made the "PB" as did one from the 3rd rd...So how can he possibly predict no other player we acquired has a possibility of making an impact this season...Hell...Impact isn't even a "PB" it's a consistent contributor or something of that nature...So what about the 2 "LB"s we signed and now that "QB" has no chance of making an impact either...
Oh!...He did say other than Campbell...
---------------------------------
The Raiders have had a terrible offensive line for the past several years
----------------------------------
Ah!...As I remember we were in the top 5 rushing for 2 seasons in a row until last season's total collapse so I'm not sure what he's talking about here...True...We had some pass-blocking deficiencies which were exacerbated by some "Dear in HeadLights" inept "QB"s but a terrible "OL" is hardly responsible for a top 5 rushing attack so there must have been something working very well at that time...
Oh! Ya!...I forgot...It was all Fargas as he ran into defenders head-on...
The "Wait-n-See" attitude is the same one we have been pimping here for weeks now...So he states it a little different...We have to prove it...OK...I don't deny that and don't expect to gain respect until we do but what up with all the "Hate"...
I have seen several posts relating to how this team has been built to win from the ground up with speed/size/athleticism/talent/youth but now needs to prove we have the leadership to succeed...Now that is something I can sign off on and it's the same as I have been posting here the last month or so...
New Leadership..."OC"-n-"DLC"...
"QB"..."JC"...
"ILB"..."RMcC" is a hopeful possibility...
PantyRaider...I'm With "H" Tipping My Full Measure!!!/_
Intoxication To Follow...
H -
As much as you don't want to believe it (because you hate Shanahan), the recognition of great coaching is simply a by-product of great players. So the statement is not really misrepresenting.
Lately, the Raiders have had neither.
PR -
The author is entitled to his opinion, just like you are. None of us know that Houston, or anyone else, will step up and make a difference. The Raiders have gone down this road too many times.
Houston wasn’t even a top-5 DT on some boards, and already the Raiders have moved him to DE. Do you want the author to concede he’s a slam dunk before his first snap of the ball?
McClain has real football acumen. He’s the polar opposite of the Raider's #1 pick last year.
Jonesy,
I like the guys you picked out to prove your point about DT's doing most of the tackling. Problem is for Kinlaw and Sistrunk tackles weren't an official stat. Same is true for most of Howie's career.
Also, even though Howie did move inside on occasion, most of the time he lined up as a defensive end.
Alzado would also switch between DT and DL. Same for Sistrunk who is listed on the roster as a DE for '76 according to Pro Football Reference. The starting DT/NT that year was Dave Rowe
Kinlaw was listed as a NT. So he could be a true measure, if the measurement you speak of is available somewhere.
Try one of the more contemporary DT's or NT's where stats are available. Use another team if you have to. I don't mind.
H
NYRaider,
"As much as you don't want to believe it (because you hate Shanahan), the recognition of great coaching is simply a by-product of great players. So the statement is not really misrepresenting."
I don't hate the guy. He was coach of the Geldings. And, I think he is overrated. That's all there is to it. He demanded, and got control of the entire football operation and after Elway retired the team became mediocre.
Besides, I didn't say it was misrepresenting. The guy was stating a common notion that I disagree with.
Yet he is still revered and will go into the HOF with the same number of Super Bowl rings as Flores who gets very little respect from the media.
I don't think that way about all division coaches. I liked Hank Stram and I believe Dan Reeves was underrated as a coach at Denver. Reeves just never had the running game he wanted to complement Elway's skills.
H
NYRaider,
I state now, and always have. No player drafted is a Slam Dunk. Not even Rolando.
I watched the BCS game again. Alabama was continually running away from where Houston lined up. On several plays he lined up at DE. He got one of the few tackles for loss when Alabama ran the ball.
The draft is, for the most part, a crapshoot.
I was merely passing along information as you were. Make of it what you wish.
You're reading way to much into what I posted.
H
"NYR"...
True but he has a definite slant and I pointed that out...Most of what he says is the same thing we have been saying for sometime now.. "Wait-n-See" or "Prove It"...
He just has to have his little digs and I don't agree with those digs and so point it out...He is quoting from someone else as an authority while he paraphrases what they say as he posts his personal opinions mixed in as though his opinions are also from the authority who ever it was...I don't like that crap...
Separate your take from the others as you use what they wrote as a base...OK...I do it that way...Not mixing in what I want with what they said as this writer does...In my opinion he is trying to give credit to himself threw another's words/knowledge...
Look...I have to give my opinion almost daily based upon collected scientific data or research...That's an educated guess without the quantitative evidence to establish it as factual and I so state it as such...Unfortunately those who like my guess try to use my opinion as evidence to establish a fact and I have to rebuke them for it...Repeatedly...
PantyRaider...Opinions Are Personal -n- NOT Factual Evidence!!!/_
"NYR"...
Do you want the author to concede he’s a slam dunk before his first snap of the ball?
NO...I also don't want to hear how it's not possible for him or anyone else on this team to produce...That's a very stupid opinion based upon what...Upon nothing but personal wishes...Slanted...Once a loser always a loser...
PantyRaider...I Don't Buy That Crap!!!/_
PR -
Perhaps you should go back and read the blog again. The author didn't say Houston would fail. Just the opposite.
He just doesn't hold him to the high expectation of McClain, who was drafted in the top-10.
The blog is full of flattery for the Raiders. But it also points out some real concerns going into the 2010 season.
Accept the fact that the Raiders might not win 16 games this year, and you can view the article a bit more objectively.
"NYR"...
I copy-posted what he said...
---------------------------------
Oakland’s only major acquisition of 2010 who could make an immediate impact was middle linebacker Rolando McClain.
---------------------------------
Now the way I read that is Houston and the rest wont be making any impact this season...That's what he said not what I said...So...At least he gave us the possibility of have 2 impact players in one season so that's better than before...
Personally I think "DHB" made a huge impact last season...Why just look at all the "Mediot" coverage and fan posts he received...
Ha! Ha!.........
Something + (Pos) on McClain...
“We haven’t started contract talks,” he said. “I’m not sure where we are on that. I leave that to (agent) Pat Dye Jr. and the Raiders. I just play football.
“I’m not looking to sit out. In order to play for the team, I need to be in training camp. I’m going to OTAs (organized team activities) and not worried about the contract.”
McClain said he has been to a couple of minicamps in Oakland and is impressed with the team’s talent.
“Everybody works hard and everbody does things to make good plays. But when you’re in the NFL, everybody is pretty good.”
Sounds like my "RunDMc" when he was drafted and said he was ready to sign and get to work so this is a very positive thing to see in our young future leaders...
PantyRaider...Bright Future We Hope!!!/_
"JoneAss"...
You still in the corner sucking your thumbs or have you started studding that "Attari" yet to understand blocking schemes....And dammit I told you to keep your damn thumbs off that X-Box now get away from it...Your no where's near intelligent enough to digest "Maden 05"...Your "Peanut" will explode...That's the TRUTH...
JUST SHUT-UP -n- GET OUT of HERE!!!
BloodShot eyes trying to break-down film of Raiders' 3-4....
PantyRaider...Despicable Fool!!!/_
PR -
I read it more as a compliment to McClain. I think a writer that declares any draft pick as an immediate impact player goes out on a limb.
He also makes an excellent point that the Raiders have EARNED the reputation of whiffing in the first round of the draft.
Many of us thought Michael Huff would contribute as an immediate impact player. Also, Robert Gallery, Darren McFadden and others. Some here thought DHB would.
The Raiders have taken on greater risk with McClain, by trading Morrison. McClain is on an island at MLB, where the Raiders have little or no options.
Houston could be a role player, and will be part of a rotation that includes several other qualified DEs.
So get over it. Give the author some latitude to walk out on that limb for one player.
"NYR"...
Simply a difference in approach...I could walk out on a limb for another player without trying to knock the legs out from under everyone else on the roster...Addition by Subtraction shouldn't apply within our own personnel/roster...
For instance I could continue to pimp my boy "RunDMc" but don't need to cripple Bush in the process...Instead I would support them as a tandem and point to "McFabs" strengths and how they will dominate where Bush is weak while noting Bush could be a monster if used properly but different than "McCatch"...
Bush between the tackles while "RunDMc" runs wide or lines up in the slot or in motion...
Now looking at Houston as the "LDE" lined up over the "RG" -n- "TE" where he draws the double and causes the "TE" to stay inside as a blocker rather than to release into a pattern or the "FB" has to move to a position of protection which means he doesn't block for the "RB" or the "LT" and noting he won't be an impact player this season is a bit of a reach...
If he causes that much shifting in the responsibilities of the "OT"/"TE"/"FB" he has already made his impact while someone else should come free to make a play...If they also try to double Seymour there are only 2 blockers left to deal with 2 "DL" -n- "MLB" or "S" on the blitz...
"LT"/"LG".........Seymour...
"RT"/"TE"/"FB"....Houston...
"C"/"RG"..........Kelly/Bryant "DT" Depth...Joseph/Heard/Cooper
"DE" Depth...Richardson/Scott/Shaughnessy
Now just imagine if I posted..
Kelly/Hainsworth at "DT"...
Seymour/Houston at "DE"...
Now who would they try to double...
Get the picture...Houston is being put in a position to become an immediate impact if he can produce anywhere near his expected abilities...Add Hainswoth into the mix and how could one not expect a huge impact out of Houston...
PantyRaider...I Luv That "D" -w- Al @ "DT"....
PR -
How did the author "knock the legs out from under everyone else on the roster" as you say?
Just because you chose to live in a world of speculation and conjecture, don't expect the author of a blog or sports media to jump out there with you.
06/08/2010 Signed WR Damola Adeniji
"NYR"....
What???...
Was this poster "Speculating" or talking from a position of established "Facts"....As I remember the "Facts" are an aftermath computed as "Stats" -n- "W/L" Records...Anything else is simply speculation before the "Fact" and should be presented/accepted as such...
In other words every negative you have posted regarding this up-coming season prior to the 1st flip of a coin is pure conjecture as is mine and "BR"s and "H"s and "CJ"s -n- Gary's -n- "RT"s and -n- and -n- and -n-....None of us have that answer yet...Especially not the "Mediot"s..
My point was as to why he feels the need to limit the the rosters possible production...Thus "Knocking the legs out from under everyone else on the roster"...That was just a simple expression..Why did that upset you so much...
He said...His Words...
----------------------------------
Oakland’s only major acquisition of 2010 who could make an immediate impact was middle linebacker Rolando McClain.
----------------------------------
Now how should I have interpreted that post except that he is limiting their possible production and based upon what exactly...That we have a history of draft picks that fail as you posted....
The more we talk about this poster the less I like him already...My question is why does my lower opinion of what he wrote upset you so much...It's just an opinion about an un-known poster NOT a Raiders' player or coach or management...Why do you demand that I like him or what he posted...
PantyRaider...Quite Simply I Don't!!!/_
I posted why I think Houston will have an immediate impact this season...Why do you think he wont...Because he was drafted to play "DE" instead of the "DT" you wanted him to be...That would be an interesting conversation...NOT arguing about some obscure web-poster...
I'm tired of stupid arguments...I have one on-going with "Shit for Brains" "Can't Break Down Film" "I Know The TRUTH" "Liar" "My Credentials" "COACH"....
Where is that 4-3 evidence you moron...
“I think we’ve learned with this team that it stinks until proven otherwise,” Williamson said. “It has improved in some areas, but so has every team. I still think it is a five- or six-win team until it can show it is really ready to make dramatic improvements.”
I agree with these sentiments. It is nice to talk about what's transpired this off-season but for most of us, the actual results on the field are what counts. Yeah, it's prove it time for me.
My questions going into the 2010 season are quite simple;
Can we run the ball effectively?
Can we adequately protect the QB?
Will we have a dynamic passing attack that leads to a more potent offense?
Can we stop the run when it counts?
The answers to these questions will determine whether we are another mere 4-5 win team or a competitive 7-10 win team.
"CJ"...
Yes..True...But I wont sell us short...I'm one of those "My Glass Runith Over" types...Preseason speculations are the only joy I have felt lately with the way our seasons have progressed...
#1) Run the ball..
We really have absolutely no excuse not to...We were a top 5 rushing team 2 seasons in a row until last yr and still have that same veteran talent on the team as a "RB" tandem...No Excuses...They have to produce and the coaches have to put them in a position to produce...This is an area where I expect high production this season...
#2) Protection...
This will continue to be an area of concern...I'm beginning to wounder if it's a fault of the "ZBS"...When it worked for the "Donko"s Elway was very illusive but the pocket broke down repeatedly...He was running for his life and making plays off his creativity until his knees failed...
I didn't watch Atlanta enough to see what worked or what didn't...To be honest...Looking at the Raiders' "OL" play I'm a little confused as to what their trying to accomplish and that scheme doesn't make sense to me...I understand what it's suppose to accomplish but aside from being strong in the run I don't see it's other values...
#3) Passing Game...
I think we all expect a huge improvement over what we have suffered threw sense Gannon went down...I never watched "JC" play so can't comment on what he brings to us...Only know what has been written from those who supposedly know...
The "OC" will have as much to do with that development as the "QB"...
#4) Stop the Run...
You know how I feel on this one....We have addresses most of our needs on that side of the ball except that huge force up the middle who is a leader and brings motivation to elevate his teammates...Bring in Hainworth and that problem is solved...Without him it continues to be suspect and dependent upon how well McClain can dominate as a "MLB"...Asking allot of our new rookie...
Really when we break it down were not very far off...
#4) One player on the "DL"...
#3) Further development of our "WR"s/"QB"/Scheme/Gameplan/Adjustments which largely has to do with the "OC"...Perhaps also the addition of veteran help at "WR"...
#2) Development of our new "OL" talent and improvement in implementing the scheme...
#1) We should already have it but may need to add a "FB" as blocker...
PantyRaider...Too Much Positive!!!/_
"ZBS"...
We have noted that our "WR"s are apt at blocking instead of in the past when players like Moss avoided contact...Interestingly I found this talking about the "ZBS" and it clicked with that improvement from our "WR"s...
---------------------------------
Players other than offensive linemen may enhance the success of a zone blocking scheme. For example, in a run-based spread attack the primary responsibility of receivers is less to catch passes than to execute downfield blocks, springing the ball carrier and extending the run.
----------------------------------
Well now...That could certainly lead to less receptions/stats/production in the record books...How could we possibly evaluate the value of a "WR" if not for receptions/game...Ave yds/game -or- per pass...
It's hardly possible to apply that to our "O"s limited output last season but does give a possibility as to what they were trying to accomplish although it failed miserably...."DHB" was said to be a good blocker as was Murphy/Chaz...So should we now start to keep count on blocks along with receptions/drops/yds per game...
PantyRaider...Zone-Blocking Confusion!!!/_
Zone Blocking Tutorial: Inside Zone Runs
Hay...Now this one makes some sense of it all...Looks good for the run game anyway...Now who can explain how it's suppose to work in pass protection...
http://www.rockytoptalk.com/2009/3/31/815874/
zone-blocking-tutorial-inside-zone
Now the vid...Sucks that it's the "Donko"s...
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-
playbook/09000d5d80aec9cf/Billick-on-Denver
-s-zone-blocking-scheme
This crap wasn't around back in the "60"s when I played the game...
PantyRaider..."ZBS" Confusion!!!/_
Here is another interesting post referring to the woes of the "ForeSkins" and how "JC" suffered as their "QB"...Let's hope he fairs better with us...
http://www.examiner.com/x-450-Washington-
Redskins-Examiner~y2010m1d9-A-look-at-Mike-
Shanahans-zone-blocking-scheme
PantyRaider...Sound Like Our "OL" Was Dominate Compared To Theirs!!!/_
PR -
Your persepctive on Houston makes him sound like the next coming of Howie Long. No wonder rookie contracts are out of control. You want to annoint the rookie a star player before his first snap.
I remind you that it's tough to make an immediate impact in the NFL, ala, Robert Gallery, Michael Huff, Darren McFadden, and DHB.
These are all players the Raiders recently drafted in the top-10 and expected them to make an immediate impact... and each fell flat on their face.
Here's what the author said about Houston. Quote:
"...second-round pick Lamarr Houston is an intriguing player to watch on the defensive line."
That's what he is... an intriguing player to watch. He may end up having more of an impact than McClain, which would fit right in with recent Raiders' drafts.
This author has kept it simple and realistic, citing both positive and negative things going into the 2010 season. Do you? Your opinions are so biased it's clouded your chance for reasonable perspective.
"NYR"...
Now your not even being nice or legit...
Go back to my reply to "CJ" and I was negative about our "OL"s pass protection and questioned if it was a weakness of the "ZBS" we try to play in as well as our "DL" if we fail to address the "DT" position...I was also demanding that there is NO excuse for this team NOT to be a top running "O"...
Now just how negative do you need me to be..."Doom-n-Gloom" is NOT a realistic viewpoint before the 1st toss of a coin...
I than posted info about that scheme while further questioning it's effectiveness in pass blocking and called attention to the role of the "WR"s in support...There is plenty there for you to argue about with legitimate info to show why instead of worrying about your pet post and my reaction to it...
This is what you term as "Simple-n-Realistic"...
--------------------------------
The Raiders have had a terrible offensive line for the past several years
Oakland’s only major acquisition of 2010 who could make an immediate impact was middle linebacker Rolando McClain.
--------------------------------
Show me where that's a realistic post...Post the legitimate info to support it...Not just some words from another poster...
Was our "OL" blocking for one of the top 5 rushing "O"s for 2 recent seasons or were they not...Do you now deny that as fact...Just "Smoke-n-Mirrors"...We lost 2 key players to "FA" and to injury..."C"-n-"LT" and we failed to deliver last season prolley as a result...
Even Mel's Nipple is now pimping Houston as well as several others so where's is your evidence that he wont be an immediate impact...That's not a "PB" that's a consistent player who does his job...No one said anything about being spectacular or a "PB" or even a top "DE" in the league...But your poster -n- you deny he will make an impact so now give your supporting evidence to that as fact...
My comment was that with Haisworth in the fold Houston would definitely have the opportunity to make a huge impact simply because the "OL"s would run out of blockers to handle all the talent-n-beef coming at them...
Houston-Hainsworth-Kelly-Seymour...
With decent substitution depth -w- experience...Now show me where I'm wrong...I challenge you to that task...Show your evidence that Houston would not be productive in that situation...Add to that our 3 new "LB"s and 3-4 "S"s as supporting cast...
And now show where our 2 new "FA" "OLB"s have NO chance to be impact players this season while befitting from what McClain brings to that "D" as you -n- your pet poster have declared...Are you now posting that with Houston at "LDE" and McClain at "MLB" our 2 new "OLB"s have NO chance to impact the game...Shit...Now if that ain't some total freakin crap...
PantyRaider...Break It Down -n- Post It!!!/_
PR -
Why should I have to prove to you statements of opinion made by others? What kind of nonsense is that? And I never said Houston would fail, as you keep implying.
The Raiders have EARNED their reputation. They have repeatedly whiffed badly in the first round of the draft, where "immediate impact players" are found.
You chose to ignore these failures and/or provide excuses based on what-ifs.
The Raiders don't pay me to scout college talent, so I don't. I read an article or two, check a Youtube video, then form my opinion.
You want me to agree with you that Houston will be an immediate impact player, despite what little I know about him and the Raiders recent history of early draft failures?
As I stated before, Houston wasn't even a top 5 DT on some draft boards. In fact, he was the 7th DT selected in the draft... after which the Raiders switched him to DE, where they have other viable player options.
You post like you know exactly how Oakland's DL will line up and the successes they will enjoy.
I know Houston has played DE, but the Raiders remain weak in the middle, where I thought they were drafting help. This remains a concern for me.
IMO, Houston looks like a player. But I also thought Gallery, Huff, McFadden and even Russell would make an immediate impact. So, my opinion doesn’t mean shit.
Jonesy,
Those videos you posted?????
One was a fight in the stands and none of them showed the interior DL making a bunch of tackles.
In fact, the first play in the first one showed the DT's tied up in the middle and the outside rusher (I think he was an OLB) making the tackle.
Are you actually trying to make my point for me?
H
OK "NYR"...
We agree the middle is still a huge concern...
I'm hoping the return of our "DL" coach from the Gruden era can get them to play well as a unit but still feel inadequate in the middle and am of the opinion Haisworth would settle that issue immediately and boost the entire "D" unit in the process...
As for our "Whiffed Badly" is concerned the jury is still out on that one...
Huff is developing finally and "RunDMc" is talented if used properly..."DHB" paid little in returns last season except his value as decoy -n- blocking but may yet develop into a key player in our new "O"...Gallery is a key in the "OL" even if not playing "LT"...
I personally suspect the slow development of these players has as much to do with coaching/scheme/gameplan/no adjustments as it does with the individual player...
So "JeFat" is the only one that's a given fact as worthless pick...
PantyRaider...Slow Returns On Investments!!!/_
PR -
"Slow return-on-investment" is part of the whiff.
When you're selecting in the top-10 (and paying mega-millions), the expectation is that the player selected will come in and immediately impact his drafted position.
Gallery didn't make a contribution for several years, and not until he was moved away from his drafted position of LT. Huff was supplanted by Hiram Eugene (2x). McFadden, before injury, couldn't even displace Fargas. Russell is gone after three seasons of misery. And DHB didn't even perform to the standards of a 4-7 round pick.
I would guess no team, in the last several years, has failed in the first round as badly as the Raiders. I'm sure that's not a reach.
When the smoke clears on guys like Russell, DHB and McFadden, "whiff" may be a gross understatement.
In fairness to DHB and my repeated criticisms of his performance last year - and to show I try and post objectively - J-Mac is reporting that DHB is tearing it up in OTAs, and looked better than Murphy on two consecutive practices that the media was allowed to observe.
Starting DBs were out, and apparently DHB was "having his way" with the rookie DBs and/or backups.
No question DHB is putting in the work, and I respect that. However, the real test is yet to come.
As NYR states perfectly "the real test is yet to come".
My questions below are legitimate concerns and unanswered questions going forward into 2010.
Can we run the ball effectively?
Can we adequately protect the QB?
Will we have a dynamic passing attack that leads to a more potent offense?
Can we stop the run when it counts?
Of course health, performance, coaching, and execution will collectively be the key to solid, tangible improvements.
"NYR"...
Yes..."Slow Returns" are for real and some of that could be understood as the team rather than just the player which mean the selection wasn't so terrible as much as the use of the pick was so terrible...
Gallery was moved from side to side "OT" to "G" and told different things from different coaches eventually settling down to a damn good "G" in the "ZBS"...Now in a "PBS" what position would he play...That is an unanswered question at this point...He was drafted as a "PB" "OT" not a "ZB" "OT" and evidently there is a difference...The real question is would he have developed nicely at "OT" on some other team...
After him it was Fabian Washington who was scraped and traded under "SOB" along with Woodson and both those players are now starters on other teams and one is a "PB"er so those were NOT lousy picks just lousy use of those picks...
Our Namndi took it upon himself to get better and has developed into a top rated "PB"er at his position...Definitely not a wasted pick but paid very slow returns...
"JeFat" was not used well but he was also worthless of his own accord so that one is now a definite waist...
"McFab" is highly talented and has had the opportunity to show it at times when our "OL" was blocking well...Sense than he has failed to deliver just as much as that "OL" has failed to deliver...Added to that was the piss poor "QB"s and the piss poor schemes/gameplans/play calling/adjustments so why would we have expected him to produce well in a situation of almost complete disaster...So the jury is still out...I would not post a waist by any means but definitely paying slow returns...
You already covered "DHB" and his slow returns...
Add to this list the slow to no returns we got out of "FA"s who produced elsewhere prior to the Raiders and some have also produced after...I think the story is obvious here...
So as a result no matter how well we did in the draft it was to no avail if the coaches couldn't put this talent in a position to make plays..Instead they continued to run Fargas well beyond what was reasonable at the expense of the rookies and the team...
Bush was only a 4th rd pick but he most certainly would have produced better elsewhere....Almost anywhere else for that matter...Think what he could have done in Denver for instance...
So I'm not one to boycott the draft because we are so lousy...I'm more one to bash the coaches and their hiring so to that Al has his fare share of the blame...He hired and he eventually fired...He drafted and he signed and he eventually released...But he didn't coach so the rest falls on those who did...And I won't buy he designs the schemes...That has changed drastically from "HC" to "HC" and so has how the players were used and the play calling...
PantyRaider...Slow Returns -n- 7 Year Itch!!!/_
"CJ"...
Your questions were good ones and I addressed them a few post back after you posted them the 1st time...So now show why we wont be able to do the things you question...Why do we fail so badly...Is it connected to the scheme or our use of that scheme...
PantyRaider...Posted "ZBS"s Questionable Pass Blocking!!!/_
06/09/2010 Signed offensive linemen Allen Smith and Elliot Vallejo
PantyRaider...Camp Fodder Or Talent!!!/_
PR -
At least we can agree that the Raiders, for a number of reasons, under-utilized and underdeveloped the talent which they procured.
For too long, it’s not been a good environment for young players. Perhaps that has changed now with Cable and Jackson, and the present coaching staff.
J-Mac reported that the DB coaches were uncharacteristically vocal during practice. Is that a show for the media, or is Jackson’s demeanor rubbing off on other coaches.
It’s time to put up or shut up for everyone on this team, top to bottom. Time to get pissed off and stop making excuses.
Don’t feel reserved to point out weaknesses and question authority. Come to the dark side.
I'm going to speculate a little here but I have serious questions as to the source and why...
http://www.ibabuzz.com/oaklandraiders/2010/
06/09/raiders-not-on-same-page-after-all/
That thread reports that a player must have leaked the violations at practice to the NFLPA in order to get a violation in progress...Than it also notes that the 2 hr limit has been pushed during the Wednesdays that the "Mediot"s are welcome to attend...
In conclusion:
These same damn "Mediot"s have been posting foul while trying to get interviews with the "OC" and others so their motivation to do something like this is a definite possibility...At any rate it has now cost the team 2 days of preparation that we can never get back at a time exultant progress is evidently being made...
If any of these asinine bastards were involved they earn the scorn they receive...
The reverse of this is that as noted in the posting "Mutinous Dawgs" continue to disrupt this team...And or Mole!!!...
PantyRaider...Damn "Mediot" Conspiracy!!!/_
"NYR"...
I live on the "DarkSide" but just approach it respectfully if possible...
I think your right about Hue rubbing off and maybe that was his plan...He is vocal and calling out the "D" so they can't just shake it off and ignore it any longer...Now they have to get up and in the face of our "O"...
WoW!...How long has it been sense we had an "O" that could get in anyone face...Reading about how our passing attack is eating up our "LB"s and depth in the "DB"s is not a good thought but Damn...Having an "O" that can get after it this way is a damn great thought...
Maybe the pushing will elevate the development and play on both sides of the ball...Last year we were so passive and calm in camp with choreographed play that our "D" went out and played the same way as a result...Or something like that...This year they should have a damn good "HateTrip" going and be looking forward to smashing someone in the mouth....
PantyRaider...Elevated Development In "OakTown"????!/_
PR -
You are welcome to continue to chase your own tail, make excuses, and speculate. It is your own opinions and you are more than welcome to voice your views.
Let me give you my unfiltered opinions and take it for what it is worth (only my humble opinions).
If you look at our 1st round selections all the way back to 2001, excluding Asomugha, we have whiffed ... big time. There is no denying that NONE of these guys have made a significant impact. Sure, Gallery is a good OG but who picks an OG at #2? Huff, after a few years, is a serviceable FS. Big deal.
2009 #8 Derrious Hayward Bey, WR
2008 #4 Darren McFadden RB
2007 #1 JaMarcus Russell, QB
2006 #7 Michael Huff S
2005 #23 Fabian Washington CB
2004 #2 Robert Gallery, OT
2003 #32 Tyler Brayton DE
2002 #23 Napoleon Harris LB
2001 #28 Derrick Gibson DB
1st round picks should be and need to be the building blocks of any successful team. 1st round picks need to make a significant impact.
You ask "So now show why we wont be able to do the things you question..."
No. Let's wait to see the performance on the field. I don't need to justify my concerns with the backdrop of 7 consecutive seasons of 11+ losses.
Our team didn't run the ball effectively, protect the QB, have a decent passing attack, or stop the run last year ... we will need a serious upgrade in performance and execution, good health (and luck), coaching-up the players, devising creative and sound schemes, and guys like Campbell, McClain, and Houston stepping up BIG TIME to see the type of improvements we will all be proud of.
DT, OLine, and WR are still legitimate concerns for me in terms of talent and depth.
"CJ"...
Why exclude Namndi...He was in his 4th yr when he started to produce and later become the "PB"er he is now...Charles Woodson also...When was his 1st "PB"...
Look around the NFL....How many 1st rd selections turn into "PB"s ever...Most never make it and most who do make it after 3-4 seasons....The rest are the exceptions...
So now you demand immediate results where that's just not the norm...The ones who do showed something to the one who drafted them and gave them future hopes but I believe most understood there was going to be work involved to get them to that point....Otherwise we would have 32 new "PB"ers every season...Do we even come close to such a thing...
Only time I can recall was the "CowGirls" under "JJ" as "HC"...That was a total rarity...
PantyRaider...Facts-n-Stats!!!/_
PantyRaider...A Developed Talent Is No Whiff!!!/_
CJ said: "DT, OLine, and WR are still legitimate concerns for me in terms of talent and depth."
These are areas that the Raiders sufferred most last year, and areas that they have done little to improve this year (in terms of immediate help).
I'm afraid the Raiders won't add any vet help at WR, meaning they won't have a seasoned vet WR until one of their own becomes one.
They've added a lot of bodies to the OL, but most likely none are ready (some not capable) of stepping into a starting role.
At DT, the Raiders simply lack adequate talent in the middle of the DL.
IMO, it will be at least another year before we can start filling these holes and adding necessary depth.
PR said" "Look around the NFL....How many 1st rd selections turn into "PB"s ever...Most never make it and most who do make it after 3-4 seasons....The rest are the exceptions..."
PR, FYI, making the Pro Bowl isn't the only measure of player success.
You want to lump the Raiders in with the rest of the NFL in terms of drafting, but only the Raiders have been in the top 8 selections of the draft for the last 7-8 years. No other team holds claim to that status.
So the standard to which the Raiders should be held for producing NFL talent from the first round of the draft is greater than any other team.... to which they have failed miserably.
There are no comparisons.
"NYR"...
"DT" Albert Hainsworth "2010"
Draft History Last Decade...
Raiders 210 pts/13 picks = 16.15 ave pick
Detroit 155 pts/13 picks = 11.92
ave pick
Cincinnati 125 pts/11 picks = 11.36 ave pick
Dare you to look at Az/Wa/Cl/Sf
Detroit Lions
1 Matthew Stafford QB "09"
Raiders #7
17 Gosder Cherilus T "08"
Raiders #4
2 Calvin Johnson WR "07"
Raiders #1
9 Ernie Sims OLB "06"
Raiders #7
10 Mike Williams WR "05"
Raiders #23
7 Roy Williams WR "04"
30 Kevin Jones RB
Raiders #2
2 Charles Rogers WR "03"
Raiders #31-n-#32
3 Joey Harrington QB "02"
Raiders #17-n-23
18 Jeff Backus T "01"
Raider #28
20 Stockar McDougle T "00"
Raider #17
9 Chris Claiborne OLB "99"
27 Aaron Gibson T
Raider #18
Cincinnati Bengals
6 Andre Smith T "08"
9 Keith Rivers OLB "08"
18 Leon Hall CB "07"
24 Johnathan Joseph CB "06"
17 David Pollack LB "05"
26 Chris Perry RB "04"
1 Carson Palmer QB "03"
10 Levi Jones T "02"
4 Justin Smith DE "01"
4 Peter Warrick WR "00"
3 Akili Smith QB "99"
Now you have a legitimate comparison...
PantyRaider...Whoops! Past 7 Glorious Seasons!!!/_
Unsportsmanlike Conduct...Retro-Posting -n- Taunting!!!!...
Isn't that the problem any more?
We measure ourselves against the Bengals and Lions.
And proudly, apparently.
Sad.
Yes "RT"...It's very Sad...
Throw in Az/Cl/Wa/Sf and any other loser this decade...
But Wait!!!...Is There Hope...
PantyRaider...Look At The Turnaround Az Made!!!/_
CJ: I think DHB was a #7 selection. And don't look now, but it looks like DHB is about to make a monkey out of you.
You know the nice thing about Timmy Kawakami's predictability is that you know if he has a choice of what to say, he's always going to find the most negative slant possible when it comes to the Raiders - from ownership, to coaching, to players, to fans. If he has something positive, you know there has to be something to it.
He wrote an article saying that even though it's "non contact" (tell that to the NFLPA), DHB looks very much like a #7 1st Round pick.
Also, apparently McFadden has worked his way back into the #1 RB competition. Huff is playing very well, as is Gallery.
I don't think this list is as big a downer as you say it is. Especially considering that our later round picks have been pretty damned good.
Save your breath. I know. They've been losing for seven years. Well, that's about to change.
Look at us! We're not the only perennial loser! What a rallying cry.
Yes, let's look at Arizona. They hired Whisenhunt, who came to Oakland for the job that we gave to Lane Kiffin.
In the first rounds, they have drafted Fitzgerald (pro bowl), Cromartie (pro bowl alternate), Beanie Wells (stud) and Antrelle Rolle (pro bowl) since 2004.
And they signed Kurt Warner (pro bowl).
So yes let's compare ourselves to the Cardinals.
Regarding DHB, what I've heard now from two different places, and DHB confirms it, that DHB has learned how to use that speed that you guys hate so much. He's learned that blinding speed allows him to manipulate the positions of the DBs if he uses it right. Then it's just a matter of finding the open spot on the field and coming back for the ball.
Schilens is back at full strength, but currently a little rusty. We might actually have three legitimate WRs this season. Plus we have a QB who can get the ball to them. Those facts alone will open up the running game.
"CJ"...
I take exception on a few picks you posted and the ones you left off that list who are still in the game today...
2009 #8 Derrious Hayward Bey, WR...Now showing signs of development and may have a breakout season with adequate "QB" calling his #...
2008 #4 Darren McFadden RB...Shows talent and if used properly -w- mins in the game should be highly productive both in the running game as well as the passing game...
2006 #7 Michael Huff S...Started to develop in his 4th yr just like Namdi and now has enough talent around him to make an impact...
2005 #23 Fabian Washington CB...Had become the starter on the #3 "D" NFL but now limited by injury...
2004 #2 Robert Gallery, OT...Has developed into a damn good "G" and my be better now with a better supporting cast -n- "QB" -w- mobility...
"03" #31 Namdi "PB"...Enough Said..
2003 #32 Tyler Brayton DE...Has become the starter on the #8 "D" NFL -w- 5 sks/season...
"00" #17 Sebastian Janikowski "K"...Starter and damn good one...
"98" #4 Charles Woodson CB "PB"er...
#23 Mo Collins T...Was starter on "PO"/"SB" team...Retired...
So the names of the "Whiff"s become limited but we did have our failures...A player who developed into a consistent starting role on a good unit is no "Whiff" even if the development was late...
PantyRaider...Near History Will Tell!!!/_
Talk about always having a negative slant...
"RT"...
Az was on that list because they have as low or lower an average 1st rd pick as us...True...Their picks have paid off quickly and that's a plus to them...Ours on the other hand have been limited partially due to the coaching carousal -n- piss poor coaching/schemes/gameplans/play calling/adjustments....
Their players have had the opportunity to play with supporting talent in a well coordinated scheme...Can our players say the same...
If the "OC" can bring to us what Az has we could also be on the verge of a TurnAround" similar to what they experienced...
PantyRaider...If It Happens How Will You Survive!!!!/_
"RT"...
You conveniently left off Matt Lainart...
PantyRaider...WHY...He Is Now Their Starter!!!/_
Always Slanted...
Bush -vs- "RunDMc"...
“I think they’re both doing something exciting each day, whether it’s running the ball or pass protecting,” Cable said. “Each one of them has their own strength but they both show up every time we come out here. I actually think their both (No. 1s) and I think it’s a great deal we got going here.”
Well "CJ" this seems to be right in line with what I posted in reply to your "Can We Run The Ball" question....
PantyRaider...Can You Ignore The Hope!!!/_
I left Leinart off the list because I was highlighting all of the great picks they made.
Notice I said they signed Kurt Warner, but left off Edgerrin James. I wasn't writing a complete history of the Cardinals.
I was highlighting what the Cardinals have done to turn themselves around, mainly: hire a great head coach, sign a great quarterback and draft exceedingly well.
Now, you could say that now we're going down that path. It remains to be seen, but it's an opinion I can accept.
What I can't accept is all of this re-imagining of what has been a disaster as some sort of master plan, and trying to suggest that our first-round drafting hasn't been that bad, and using the Browns and Lions as examples to prove the point.
"RT"...
How you can read into everything is remarkable...Now show where I posted anything on the lines of this crap...
---------------------------------
What I can't accept is all of this re-imagining of what has been a disaster as some sort of master plan, and trying to suggest that our first-round drafting hasn't been that bad, and using the Browns and Lions as examples.
---------------------------------
I posted a reply to "NYR"s statement that we have no one to compare ourselves to who has consistently picked as low as we have...There we have prolley 6 teams who meet or sub-exceed our average picking spot over the past decade...
I altered my take on the plan beginning in "07" when Cable announced the process began mid "08" after he became "IHC"...Perhaps you missed that retraction but I doubt it...
PantyRaider...Get It Clear!!!/_
"BR"...
Just finished reading that post in the Tribune...What a difference a year makes...Nice to see something so positive coming out of these damn "Mediot"s and it's across the board from Mel's Nipple to "Kwami Hatester"....
PantyRaider...Not Sure What To Make Of It!!!/_
PR - you like to point to a player's 4th or 5th year as representing the start of his claim to playing at a level commensurate with his draft status, ala Michael Huff or Robert Gallery.
Isn't that about when the mega contract is about to expire?
By the 4th or 5th year, the Raiders have already paid out millions of dollars for that player to perform like a seasoned pro.
Most Raider draft picks who make it to their 4th or 5th year are just hitting mediocrity.
Funny. We beat ourselves in no-contact scrimmages and, suddenly, we can beat anybody.
PR -
I don't know exactly what you're trying to prove with your "draft values," but you neglect to consider the Raiders traded away the #7 pick in 2005 for Randy Moss.
Not much value in that. Then we obtained a 4th round pick in return, who never played a snap.
That should equal a big fat zero.
At the very least, you should take hard look at your facts and figures.
When the smoke clears, I think you'll find we didn't live up to even the Lion's low draft standards during the Matt Millen era. Ouch!
You guys are shooting blanks. Stick with speculation and conjecture regarding future conquests. It's more defensible.
"NYR"...
There was no attempt to give an excuse or make any comparisons on our "Value" in the draft...
That posting was in direct reply to your post that we have nothing to compare it to so I gave you teams that we can compare ourselves to...I did NOT compare us to anyone...Only the ave # for the 1st rd selections...Other teams picked on an ave at a lower position than us over the span of that decade...So now you and others can compare the values of what was taken with those pics...I'm not going there...
"RT" already started comparing Az's value to ours and that's very hard to dispute and I'm NOT going to attempt to...We get very slow returns on our investments while other's returns come very quickly...There is a reason for that and I'm attempting to give reasoning NOT "Excuses"....I don't excuse any of it but see it as what it is...Now "WHY"....
To say a player had NO value because he was taken high and he developed late is a bit of a misnomer I think...If he developed at all it's because he had the value to begin with...Or do you think value is something that can be learned/taught...Value as in talent/physical presence/game intelligence/commitment...Usually it's there or it's not...Just look at "JeFat"...
So I post it's not the picks so much as it's the failure to develop those picks....The failure to put them in a position of production...Across the board the evidence is fairly clear this has been a problem not only with picks but also with "FA"s...
If Fabian can develop into the starting "CB" on the #3 "D" unit in the game than why couldn't he hold his own with us...
If Tyler could develop into the starting "DE" on the #8 "D" unit in the NFL than why couldn't he produce under "SOB"...
If Charles Woodson is a "PB"er on the #2 "D" in the NFL than why the hell didn't we see his value and have him teamed with Namndi today...
Those questions have answers...I'm just attempting to find the answer NOT excuse any of it...And relate what has happened to these players as a pattern of what is happening to others on our roster in an attempt to gain understanding/reasoning/resolution....
PantyRaider....No Excuses Just Reasons!!!/_
PR - 9 drafts and these 9 guys;
2009 #8 Derrious Hayward Bey, WR
2008 #4 Darren McFadden RB
2007 #1 JaMarcus Russell, QB
2006 #7 Michael Huff S
2005 #23 Fabian Washington CB
2004 #2 Robert Gallery, OT
2003 #32 Tyler Brayton DE
2002 #23 Napoleon Harris LB
2001 #28 Derrick Gibson DB
I understand some 1st round picks take a year or 2 to become good to top players.
Which of these guys fits this description? I don't discount Gallery's value as an OG after struggling as a OT. However, let's keep it real, shall we? Gallery was the #2 pick in the draft. 4 year after being drafted, he has become a good OG. There is a huge difference in my expectations and yours. At no time did I say a 1st round pick should be a pro bowl player. All I said, and it has been true to date, is we whiffed big time on the last 9 drafts. Whiffing means that the player you take in the 1st round is:
(a) still with the team (bye bye Russell, Washington, Tyler Brayton,
Harris, and Gibson.)
(b) was a solid starter who performed well on the field
(c) made a tangible, impact toward's W's.
(d) was an improvement over the previous positional starter
BR said, "CJ: I think DHB was a #7 selection. And don't look now, but it looks like DHB is about to make a monkey out of you."
Why would he make a monkey out of me? I have been on record stating my opinions on DHB which include some of the following;
(1) he was drafted too high
(2) he didn't produce (9 receptions in 10 games)
(3) I like his work ethic
(4) The "decoy" and blocking attributes are WIDELY over rated and over valued
(5) I want him to succeed.
BR, I like DHB. I want DHB to do well. If he produces at a decent rate in 2010 (ie. 40 receptions, 5 TDs), it will be a great "comeback" story and I will applaud him for his drive and intestinal fortitude.
Please, don't get things twisted. I'm a longtime Raider fan and you have the gall to act like I'm rooting against DHB. Sad.
"CJ"...
Breaking down your list...
(a) still with the team (bye bye Russell, Washington, Tyler Brayton,
Harris, and Gibson.)
Washington, Tyler Brayton are gone as a result of poor decisions by team management -n- coaches NOT because they were such bad picks...So the "Whiff" here is on the decisions after the pick...
(b) was a solid starter who performed well on the field
Washington, Tyler Brayton again have become solid starters who perform on the field in top rated "D"s...Just not with us and that is the big "WHY" in my questioning...Now other names can also be thrown into that pot as well...
(c) made a tangible, impact toward's W's.
Well no one did that...We lost repeatedly...On both sides of the ball...Can we now put all that on the shoulders of these players or do we need to proportion it out to the coaches as well...
(d) was an improvement over the previous positional starter
Who did Washington replace....I don't remember...But he must have been better if he got playing time...Right...Unless your posting "Scholarships" here again...Most of these guys replaced someone who was unproductive but I'm not going to research who or why...
PantyRaider...Not A Great List To Evaluate!!!/_
guys, i know this guy's been roasted over the raider nation coals but gotta admit... he wrote a nice piece here about dhb. check it out...
http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_15264330?source=most_viewed
Scorpio...
"BR" and I have been talking about that too...Strange...What is happening this season if even the notorious "HateTrippers" are posting positive about our team...
PantyRaider...All Aboard da Good Ship Lollipop!!!/_
Aye! Mattes!!!...
thing is panty, that's the way it usually is. unfortunately the raiders have been so bad for so long, we come to expect the media to constantly rip 'em. if the team sucks, so does the press. if we win, the press is positive.
scorpio...
It's scary when the press is positive but were still losers until proven otherwise...
I can remember bad press when we were winning...They could always find some Neg to post in their rags...
PantyRaider...UpsideDown-n-InsideOut!!!/_
PR - If a player is cut or traded to another team and does well is meaningless. The point is how did the player perform for us and what positive contribution was made for OUR team.
I really don't give a shit if Washington and Brayton had mild success elsewhere. What matters is that when we draft in the 1st round that the player does well for us. You have an annoying habit of taking a list of bums and twisting things, speculating, and making excuses. Review the list again and tell me how these players have made a significant impact on our fortunes. We are talking about 9 years of whiffs. We are talking about a list of players who haven't done jack shit. Don't tell me that it is ok to have a kicker and 1 other player (Asomugha) worth talking about.
"CJ"...
Yada! Yada! yada!....
Why didn't we get a return from the investment...Because the player was worthless or because the team was worthless...That's the difference...
I looked at that list and added to it...Now why didn't they pay dividends...
Some were not very good and failed to produce even after their release from this team...
Gibson #28/Harris #23/Russel #1...
Some were quality players and produced after they left this team....
Woodson #4/Washington #23/Brayton #32
Some are still developing and showing signs of value...
Huff #7/McFadde#4/"DHB" #8...
Some have already developed into quality starters...
Gallery #2/Namndi #31/Jano #17...
While on this team no one produced wins...We're losers...
Now how do you want to stretch it to fit...
The pick was bad...
The player had no talent...
The team was without scruples...
It's All Al's Fault...
PantyRaider....Take Your Pick!!!/_
PR -
Despite what you say, then redact, you are comparing us to other teams. That’s the basis of your post.
You said: "Other teams picked on an (avg) at a lower position than us over the span of that decade."
I just showed you that your number for the Raiders is artificially inflated due to them trading away a #7 pick in 2005 for Randy Moss.
How are the numbers (you’re making up) going to demonstrate that the Raiders drafted better than we can observe on our own?
Even with your overlapping the Raiders AFC championship and Super Bowl years, the Raiders are still at the bottom rung of your illustration.
Give it up.
The reason we're seeing more positive press is because the Raiders are weaning themselves from THE CRAZY.
It's as simple as that. It's called substantive change, and people are noticing.
We saw flashes of this development last year in free agency, where we stopped THE CRAZY.
We now have a head coach entering his third season (counting interim status) at the helm, meaning that we seem to have stemmed the perennial coach bleeding (for now, at least).
This year, we stopped THE CRAZY in the draft. And we got rid of Russell instead of starting him beyond all reason.
And the press is taking notice.
Now, there will always be the Raider Haters in the media. But I think that even the media is fatigued with the haplessness of the Raiders. It has become...boring. There's no more glee in it for them. So they are making honest assessments, and taking notice of the positive changes.
We seem to be ridding ourselves of THE CRAZY, and people, including myself, are taking notice.
I know that blows a hole in a lot of people's theory that I can never say anything positive about the Raiders when, in fact, I'm quite positive when...our actions are POSITIVE.
To some folks, that's "strange." And therein lies the crux of the bickering around here.
"NYR"...
NO...Your wrong...I replied to your post and you can't handle the #s...I didn't even name our picks so how the hell was I comparing picks...You said there is NO one to compare us to and I gave you teams to compare us to...If you fail to make your little comparisons that that's your weakness not mine...End of story...
I don't give a damn what we traded away...Your comments have been about where and who we picked...That's where we picked in the 1st rd...Don't like it that's your problem not mine...
Well "RT" when you praise the Cards by pimping their good picks while ignoring their bad onee while at the same time bashing the Raiders for any perceived bad pick while ignoring the positives some of us prolley get a fairly clear picture of your true colors...
PantyRaider....Black Hearted!!!!/_
Oh, boo, hoo.
I was clearly and simply pointing out the many things that the Cardinals have done well to turn their team around (smart coach hire, smart free agent QB pick up and brilliant first-round drafting overall), and you're saying that makes me biased against the Raiders.
This was right after you said,
"Throw in Az/Cl/Wa/Sf and any other loser this decade..."
You're the one who called AZ a loser, and I simply pointed out the things that have made them a winner.
I don't bash the Cardinals OR the Raiders "for any perceived bad pick while ignoring the positives."
Nice try. Positive actions receive positive feedback. Negative ones don't. Period. Cardinals, Raiders, whoever.
You don't set NFL records for losing without a lot of negative actions, and so there's been a lot of negative feedback.
Get over it.
NFL Draft History last decade...
Raiders...ave 16.2th pc ave...
Cleveland...110 pts/11 pcs = 10th pc ave..
Washington...116 pts/10 pcs = 11.6th pc ave...
Arizona 154 pts/13 =11.84th pc ave...
SadFran 262 pts/14 = 18.7th pc ave..
Cleveland Browns
1 Tim Couch QB "99"
1 Courtney Brown DE "00"
3 Gerard Warren DT "01"
16 William Green RB "02"
21 Jeff Faine C "03"
6 Kellen Winslow TE "04"
3 Braylon Edwards WR "05"
13 Kamerion Wimbley OLB "06"
3 Joe Thomas OT "07"
22 Brady Quinn QB
21 Alex Mack C "09"
Washington Redskins
7 Champ Bailey CB "99"
2 LaVar Arrington OLB "00"
3 Chris Samuels T
15 Rod Gardner WR "01"
32 Patrick Ramsey QB "02"
5 Sean Taylor FS "04"
9 Carlos Rogers DB "05"
25 Jason Campbell QB
5 Levi Brown OT "07"
13 Brian Orakpo DE "09"
Arizona Cardinals
8 David Boston WR "99"
21 L.J. Shelton T
7 Thomas Jones RB "00"
2 Leonard Davis G "01"
12 Wendell Bryant DT "02"
17 Bryant Johnson WR "03"
18 Calvin Pace DE
3 Larry Fitzgerald WR "04"
8 Antrel Rolle DB "05"
6 Vernon Davis TE "06"
5 Levi Brown OT "07"
16 Dominique RodgersCromartie CB "08"
31 Beanie Wells RB "09"
San Francisco 49ers
24 Reggie McGrew DT "99"
16 Julian Peterson OLB "00"
24 Ahmed Plummer CB
7 Andre Carter DE "01"
27 Mike Rumph DB "02"
26 Kwame Harris T "03"
31 Rashaun Woods WR "04"
1 Alex Smith QB "05"
6 Vernon Davis TE "06"
22 Manny Lawson OLB
11 Patrick Willis ILB "07"
28 Joe Staley OT "07"
29 Kentwan Balmer DE "08"
10 Michael Crabtree WR "09"
Now "NYR" Knock Your Ass Out....
Ya want more...Bet I can find it...
PantyRaider...Plenty Of Teams To Compare With!!!/_
Where did you get those? Vernon Davis on the Cardinals? No Matt Leinart? Levi Brown drafted by the Redskins?
"RT"...You said...
----------------------------------
You don't set NFL records for losing without a lot of negative actions,
After you said..
I was clearly and simply pointing out the many things that the Cardinals have done well to turn their team around
----------------------------------
Now look at their average picking spot in the NFL draft and tell me they weren't making just as many negative decisions this past decade as the Raiders...
So they finally got it right after how many losing seasons and all you can do is bash the Raiders when we evidently have a similar overall record to them this past decade and appear to be taking steps to make right now...
Wins sense "99"...+ "PO" Wins..
Raiders-
5+5+4+2+4+5+4+11+10+12+8=65+4=69 Total
Cards-
10+9+8+5+5+6+4+5+7+3+6=68+4=72 Total
PantyRaider...So How About Some Praise!!!/_
Whoops!...Did I copy post in the wrong spot...Well it's late Friday Night and I haven't even had a beer...Yet...
Was it enough to change the average...We are well ahead of everyone except the "9ers" who average 2 picks later...
PantyRaider...Too many names!!!/_
No, sorry, I wouldn't have praised the Cardinals after a pathetic run earlier in the decade, so why should I praise the Raiders for an even worse run?
You're literally bragging that, in the balance, the OAKLAND RAIDERS have been as good as THE ARIZONA CARDINALS over the span of a decade.
How the mighty have fallen. How low the bar has been set. Commitment to Being As Good As The Cardinals.
The Cardinals have, in the balance, been stellar in the first round of the draft over the past six years. Cromartie, Rolle, Fitzgerald and Wells are AMONG their first rounders in that period. There's also Levi Brown. And Matt Leinart, whom you are declaring a failure. That must be news to Ken Whisenhunt.
Yet you turn up your nose at the Cardinals, as if the Raiders have matched that type of first round prowess.
Sorry, as a Raiders fan, I'm just not feeling cocky right now. Not until we win, oh, I don't know, at least SIX games.
Corrections: As noted by "RT"...
Az 10 instead of 6..
SF #6 + one pick...
Az +5 + pic...
Skins -5 - pick...
Az 163/14 pcs =11.6 ave..
SF 268/15 pcs = 17.8 ave...
Wa 111/9 pcs = 12.3 ave...
PantyRaider...11:30 PM Friday Beer Time!!!/_
NO "RT"...
My post was look at the turn around the Cards made and are the Raiders positioned to do something similar...Yours was the negative reaction to my positive view of the current situation...
PantyRaider...How Soon You Forget!!!/_
PR -
You claim to be some kind of engineer, but your theories and your math are all screwed up.
You don't need a slide rule for this. The Raiders, by virtue of their 2004 record, EARNED the #7 pick in the 2005 draft. They wasted that pick by trading it for Moss.
Separate from what they chose to do with their assigned first round draft pick, the Raiders traded up in the first round and wasted another pick on Washington... who registered the fastest 40 yd dash at the 2005 Combine.
Why don't you just stop pretending like the Raiders have done well drafting in the first round?
I'll answer that question, NY Raider.
Because it's not enough for some that we might be turning the corner due to recent changes in operational behavior.
No, we must retrofit reality and pretend that there was some method to the madness that set the NFL record for consecutive seasons of futility. Even if it means misguided boasting and gleefully comparing ourselves to the Lions and Browns.
The NEW Raiders' draft math:
2 + 7 = 16
PR - next year the Raiders will not have a first round draft pick because they traded it for Seymour.
What number will you assign them for that pick? 25?
"NYR"...
Did the Raiders pick at #7 in "04"...I missed it...Who did we take...
I posted the "Real" picks we made not the potential picks we could have made...
Look at Wa who sold 1st rd pick in 4 seasons..."03"-"06"-"07"-"08"...Now who was their picks those yrs...
Now are you really going to argue something that damn stupid...
I never said we picked well in this decade...I said we didn't pick as bad as it appears to you and some others...Understand the difference...
Now you said there is NO teams out there to compare our draft positions to...Now you have 6 other teams and I bet I can find others...
PantyRaider....Want Me To Try!!!/_
"RT"...
You are trying to claim "SC" without us meeting any of your past posted demands to show it's happening...
3 yrs hands off new "GM" -n-"HC" -w- authority over the draft/"FA"s -n- coaches...
Now you post this crap...How soon you try to forget...
PantyRaider...Gone To beer!!!/_
Big deal, PantyRaider.
So I called for a qualified new head coach and a qualified GM to be given the reins for three years after the utter debacle of 2008, which I believe was the most infamous season in Raiders history, with the worst coaching mess in Raiders history and some of the worst free agent moves in NFL history and the sixth consecutive season of 11 or more losses.
Gee, I wonder what I was thinking, suggesting that we hire an elite head coach and an elite GM to turn things around. What could I have been thinking?
And again, let's wait until we win, I don't know, six games before you start boasting how off base I was.
Meanwhile, back at the Ranch (Alameda)...
Adam Schefter has reported that the Raiders have signed former Jaguars' DT John Henderson to a one-year contract.
I'm loving this off-season...! Who traded our Raiders' management team?
My Kool-Aid glass is looking rather full right now!
~'Cat
Oh, yeah.
Please add "Wa-hoooo!" to that last post... =)
~'Cat
Gotta love THE CAT!
PR -
"Did the Raiders pick at #7 in "04"...I missed it...Who did we take..."
No. They had the #7 pick in the 2005 draft.
And "we" didn't take anybody. We pissed it away for Mandy Moss.
Draft value = ZERO!
My problem is your crazy addition that artifically places the Raiders above other (loser) teams in terms of their aggregate draft position during the past decade.
As I more or less said before, you'd be better off just saying DHB will have 60 receptions this year. That's far more defensible.
"Who traded our Raiders' management team?"
That's a good question.
Now we appear to have some talent in the middle of the DL.
I'm on board with this NEW management philosophy. Actually, I'm getting tired of writing about the Raiders' past failures. I just can't stand when others pretend like they didn't happen.
I hear you, NYR.
I just wanted to purr a bit longer...
Friggin' John Henderson, Brah!
Purr-RROAR!
/purr
Thanks, 'Take!
~'Cat
It's the bait and switch, NY Raider.
You say something positive about current events, it gets ignored. But when you are goaded into not agreeing with some bent spoon about earlier events, you are chided for being nothing but negative and ignoring the current positives.
It's not enough that I was very positive about our draft.
No, now I have to agree that our prior drafting was brilliant, at the risk of being told I'm "ignoring the positives."
Now I have to apologize for suggesting (as everyone here suggested on this board, save maybe PantyRaider) as we set and extended the worst stretch in NFL history that we get GM-level help.
Now I have to believe that winning five games is an indicator of the maturing of a great master plan years in the making.
In fact, I have to believe that wins and losses are meaningless (until, of course, we start winning).
Until then, I will get no credit for being positive about positive events.
And neither will you.
As I'm sure RaiderCat can confirm, it's like chasing your own tail.
Interesting point of view, Take, NYR.
But the thing is, I've been told that there are NO POSITIVES until we are at least back to .500.
For every current positive I've pointed out in the last three years, it gets thrown back in my face because of our final record over the last seven years.
Well sometimes the wins don't come immediately, even when you're doing things right. But if you keep doing the right things anyway, eventually they will turn into a whole bunch of Ws.
The feeling I've had since after the 2006 season is that the team committed to rebuilding from the ground up. They devised a plan to do it, and have carefully followed that plan. And since one of their main focuses seems to be youth, I have to believe they are attempting to build a dynasty for Davis to leave behind.
Laugh if you will, but it appears to me that this is the year it will at least begin to all come together. In every plan there are mistakes and stops and starts. The Raiders have made their share of mistakes, but they are sticking with the plan.
"As I'm sure RaiderCat can confirm, it's like chasing your own tail." ~nyr
Diggity on that, brah!
"Damn thing... keeps... gettin' away... ouch! Damn thing... keeps..."
~'Cat
henderson STILL has to make the team though....
BR -
"But the thing is, I've been told that there are NO POSITIVES until we are at least back to .500."
Positives and winning can be separate. The Raiders can do positive things without winning. It's just that the Raiders being a losing team doesn't change until they are no longer a losing team.
It's pretty simple. No need to put words into our keyboards.
NYR, I don't think anybody has accused this team of winning in quite some time. Are you actually saying that PR, H, me, Gary have said the team is winning? Who is putting words into who's mouth?
"But the thing is, I've been told that there are NO POSITIVES until we are at least back to .500."
That's odd, because I've noted several positives, and we're still not at .500.
"The feeling I've had since after the 2006 season is that the team committed to rebuilding from the ground up. They devised a plan to do it, and have carefully followed that plan."
I consider 2008 the most infamous season in Raiders history. It included vandalizing the season with the Lane Kiffin feud coupled with some of the worst free agent signings ever and the continuance of the Rob Ryan era on defense for no defensible reason.
And yet you include that year in a master plan that has been followed carefully?
Yes, I know, you said that mistakes will be made during the successful carrying out of any plan of this magnitude, and I will grant you that.
But I'm sorry, we're not talking about some mistakes. We're talking about the wheels coming totally off the bus. Worst season in Raiders history from an operational standpoint.
Sometimes I just can't believe what you're selling. We're two ships passing in the night.
BR said: "NYR, I don't think anybody has accused this team of winning in quite some time. Are you actually saying that PR, H, me, Gary have said the team is winning? Who is putting words into who's mouth?"
Huh?
Where did I say that? Apparently, it wasn't as simple as I thought.
Nobody has "accused" the team of winning. But there's sure a lot accusation regarding draft prowess and long-range master planning.
It's sadly comical that PR's exposition on the Raiders last decade of first round draft picks comes before the ink on Russell's walking papers has had time to dry.
I like the way this off-season has gone to include the hiring of OC Hue Jackson, trading for Jason Campbell, releasing Russell, and the drafting of Rolando McClain.
I like having positive things to point out and the feeling of traction being gained by sound, sensible decisions made by management.
However, some how, some way, some posters here want to take me down a rabbit hole and act like the past 7 years has been anything less than a complete failure.
There are always going to be hits & misses in terms of drafts, free agent acquisitions, and management decisions. The really big decisions such as your QB, Head Coach, 1st round picks, big ticket free agent acquisitions, etc. you simply can't afford to whiff.
Stringing together more major hits than major misses and not making any complete blunders is the way that we at least take some much needed positive baby steps towards respectability and competitive football.
If DT Henderson is healthy and able to contribute 30 solid snaps a game, that would be a huge plus.
Cat...
Nice info...Cool...We needed something + (Pos) around here...
"BR"...
They were bashing and now want all to forget what they were saying as they now post the same damn things that we have been pointing to for the last year or so...NO...My memory is very intact and this progress was NOT overnight as they would like us to believe...
"RT"...
Want respect...Than show it...
You bashed the "OldMan" to no end and now want me to forget your trespasses against my team...NO...I continued to stand by them in faith while you did not...I never turned to treating Al Davis with total disdain but you did...Make your amends to him and I will show the respect you earned...Until than it just ain't there Baby!!!/_
"NYR:...
How short is you memory...
---------------------------------
only the Raiders have been in the top 8 selections of the draft for the last 7-8 years. No other team holds claim to that status.
So the standard to which the Raiders should be held for producing NFL talent from the first round of the draft is greater than any other team..
---------------------------------
OK..So now I gave you a list of 6 other team who need to be held to as high or higher level of production standards as the Raiders and posted I could still find others if this isn't enough...
So now...Are you also will to extend your demanded low tolerance to them also or is it just your personal "HateTrip" for Al Davis that's getting in your way...
PantyRaider...Make The Post But Can't Take The #s In Reply!!!/_
Ryan Pickett, Green Bay Packers(30)
Kendrick Clancy, New Orleans Saints(32)
Jason Ferguson, Miami Dolphins(35)
Tank Johnson, Cincinnati Bengals(28)
Fred Robbins, New York Giants(33)
No...He did not make the list but he got the contract...Is there really a chance he doesn't make the team...Are we so deep at "DT" that his competition out weighs him...Pun....He's the biggest Vet on the roster...
John Henderson "DT" 6'7" 337#s...1st rd #9 "02"..8 seasons 2 "PB"s...Released into our laps...
Well he ain't Hainsworth but he came from that same program and they played together but Albert was drafted at #15 that season....Interesting..Very damn interesting...
Al's Magic...The "OldMan" still gots it...All Hail Al!!!...
PantyRaider...Didn't See It Coming!!!/_
PR -
Dude. Step away from the crack pipe. At least try reading my posts and typing slower when you reply.
This exchange, in which you keep posting the same muddled misinformation, began when I wrote that the Raiders have no match in drafting at the front of the pack since their long and winding road to failure began (I specifically stated 7-8 years).
It’s really quite simple. Here’s the Raiders’ draft placement.
2010 - pick #8
2009 - pick #7
2008 - pick #4
2007 - pick #1
2006 - pick #7 (traded to Minnesota)
2005 - pick #7
2004 - pick #2
By your math - the lowest score being the most pathetic (and the team which to hold to the highest standard of developing NFL talent) - the Raiders score 36.
Now, as you proudly point out, the Lions are a close match. But they score a 48 during that span.
You also mentioned Arizona. In fairness, I ignored their past three drafts during and immediately after their SB run. During the seven years prior, they score 57.
Bengals score over 100.
Turns out, the Redskins are a close match at 43.
You have spent the better part of a week working your slide rule, posting and pounding your fist that the Raiders are not the biggest draft losers.
To do so, you want to remove the Raiders’ EARNED draft pick in 2005 and replace it with a pick they traded up to select Washington at #23.
Ding! Ding! Ding! Well, with your NEW math, the Redskins may have outscored the Raiders.
Stand proud PR. You may have discovered a mathematical formula that reveals the Raiders might not be the biggest losers in football draft history.
Typo correction. The Raiders traded the #7 pick in 2005 to Minnesota... not in 2006.
I guess the Raiders' #7 picks all start to look the same after a while.
Funny. If you look back at the Raiders draft history in the first round, they've had by far the most success drafting punters and kickers.
Clearly, they should avoid selecting QBs in the first round... and they have mosty failed at WR and DB when they place speed above football acumen.
"NYR"...
The math is quite simple...I rejected you "7 Yr Limit" for a more realistic "Decade" account which is usually how things are done in the NFL....That's why we're still the "Team Of The Decades" and no other team can post that...
We can't evaluate the "2010" draft before the 1st toss of the coin so I went back to "99"...Whoops!!...That was 11 yrs but no body caught that...But I felt that was excusable because you "IAAF"er posters keep trying to cut 3 yrs off the time so I add one extra in return...
Oh! My!...I went back before "03" and that just kills all your stupid arguments to support your personal "HateTrip" with Mr Davis...
Now those are the #'s....Deal with it...
Stop trying to post what didn't happen to support your #'s game and higher expectation demands...But now it's very damn clear your NOT willing to hold anyone else to the same scrutiny that you post the Raiders/Al Davis should be held to...
And than you try to use those #'s chopped down to a 7 yr span to your liking and not even the same 7 yrs for every team..Now how "ChickenShit" was that...
PantyRaider...Illegitimate Unrealistic Reverse Reasoning-n-Arguments!!!/_
SLANTED!!!...
By the way...How do you vew drafting...
"DT"s...Russel-n-McClockton...
"OT"s...Gallery-n-Stinchcomb...
"LB"s...Harris-n-Fredrickson...
Not An Exact Science!!!!...
Sorry PR but the motto of "Team Of The Decades" rings hollow when you look at the past 2 decades.
Let's hope that this new, fresh decade that we truly return to greatness and don't prop up more empty slogans.
PR -
“Your” 1999 draft.
Matt Stinchcomb T Georgia
Tony Bryant DE Florida State
Dameane Douglas WR California
Eric Barton LB Maryland
Roderick Coleman DE East Carolina
Daren Yancey DT Brigham Young
How many of these players are still are the Raiders’ roster, or even in the NFL?
So please explain how “10 years” is relevant. Because of a hollow slogan?
The average career of an NFL player is less than four years, and it's rare that a player last seven years, let alone ten years.
In the NFL, seven years is a "body of work" for any team. The ONLY reason you want to expand that period for the Raiders is because you can't accept the facts. Wahhh!
"NYR"...
You are remarkable...Whaa!!...
You said nothing about the life time of a player...You said the 1st rd selections and that's what I listed and the average picking place in the 1st rd for 7 NFL teams including my Raiders....
Now...Show me where the NFL is looked at in the reference of 7 year spans...Show me where the NFL has ever been broken down in 7 season segments...And last year it was a 6 season segment that you guys were pimping...Why now the extra season added...
Answer...Because that's the only way to support your ridicules claims...10 yrs also includes the 3 yrs of being AFCW champs and that's just not tolerable on this board....We are losers and can't reference any time that we were not...How did you generate such a Raider "HateTrip"....
Oh! Ya!...It's an Al Davis "HateTrip" and you desperately need to hold onto it and now are trembling because we might just become winners again under his ancient leadership...Ya know...We will never win again as long as the "OldMan" is still alive as I have seen posted on this board time -n- time again...
1960-1966..
1967-1984...
1985- 1992...
1993-2000...
2001-2008...
2009-2016...
OK...Now I get it...Instead of 5 decades we have 6 "Heptades"..."Octalades"...WoW!..Ya know that's really "Cardinal" of you...You so-mart...
"CJ"...We were 3 time AFCW champs -n- AFC champs once in the last decade...Turn of the century....2000-2009...
1990-1999 we were AFCW champs "90" -n- PlayOffs "91"-n-"92"...
Add that to our "60"s-"70"s-"80"s record and you have an un-duplicated history by any team in professional sports...
Now if it's your desire to bash everything decent about my team knock yourself out but don't do it while posting as though you love this franchise...There is no love in your remarks...Just disdain Baby!!!...
(A feeling of contempt for someone or something regarded as unworthy or inferior : scorned)
PantyRaider..."Team Of The Decades" Still Rings True!!!/_
"NYR"....
Now this is very damn laughable...Ah!...Did you ever study the art of averaging...When you look at Ave Yds/Play do you understand what that is...
-----------------------------------
By your math - the lowest score being the most pathetic (and the team which to hold to the highest standard of developing NFL talent) - the Raiders score 36.
Now, as you proudly point out, the Lions are a close match. But they score a 48 during that span.
You also mentioned Arizona. In fairness, I ignored their past three drafts during and immediately after their SB run. During the seven years prior, they score 57.
Bengals score over 100.
Turns out, the Redskins are a close match at 43.
---------------------------------
Dude...You forgot to divide by the # of picks...Such as...
36/7=5.14...
Now try looking at this again...
Cincy had 11 picks that added up to 122 pts...122/11=11...
The Raiders executed 13 picks that add up to 200 pts...200/13=15.4 ave pick..
So you see during the span of that decade the Raiders picked at an average position of 15th while Cincy at an average position of 11...4 lower than us...Now the question is do you hold them to the same scrutiny that you hold the Raiders...
PantyRaider....Not Hardly!!!/_
PR -
What ridicules claims?
You mean the ridiculous claim that the Raiders - having earned the right to select from a pool of the very best (consensus top-10) players in college football for seven straight years - have drafted below average in the first round during their seven year streak of record-breaking losing... a phenomenon that may have actually contributed to their record-breaking losing streak? That ridiculous claim?
Why do you continue to post the same muddled misinformation and miscalculations?
Step outside your twisted illogic and riddle this:
If a normal rebuilding period is 10 years, why don’t the Raiders have any players on their roster from 10 years ago?
No. They’ve completely turned over their roster. And the few players that remain from seven years ago, like Nnamdi and (your hero) Sam Williams, have NEVER experienced playing on a winning team.
Do you think those players care about YOUR cry for the team of the decades? All they know is record-breaking losing.
It’s not an “Al Davis” hate trip. It’s a fact.
The truth (and another hit off that pipe you’re smokin’) will set you free.
CJ"...We were 3 time AFCW champs -n- AFC champs once in the last decade...Turn of the century....2000-2009...
1990-1999 we were AFCW champs "90" -n- PlayOffs "91"-n-"92"...
Add that to our "60"s-"70"s-"80"s record and you have an un-duplicated history by any team in professional sports...
Now if it's your desire to bash everything decent about my team knock yourself out but don't do it while posting as though you love this franchise...There is no love in your remarks...Just disdain Baby!!!...
-------------------------------
PR - Seriously? What does the slogan "Team of the Decades" imply?
To me, and most reasonable observes of reality, a "team of the decade" (any decade) means that said team dominated the decade.
The 90's
* We didn't win or participate in any SuperBowl.
* We reached the playoffs in 3 of 10 years
* We had winning seasons in only 4 of team years
1990 - We got smoked in the AFC Championship 51-3
1991 - We lost in the wild card round
1993 - We lost in the divisional round
Does this decade by any stretch of the imagination conjure up dominance, sustained excellence, notable accomplishments? No.
2000's
The decade started off very well with 3 deep playoff runs but to me it isn't the type of decade to boast about when you consider all these factors covering 10 years of Raider football;
* No SuperBowl win... shouldn't a "Team of the Decades" win at least 1 SB to make such a claim
* An NFL record of ineptitude of 7 consecutive seasons of 11+ losses.
How in your right mind can you claim this past decade to be something to be proud of when the team has set the record for sustained piss poor results? Makes no sense.
Unlike you PR, I call a spade a spade. These 2 past decades have been brutal.
Man I happen to read a few of PantyRaider's posts and I think my IQ went down a few points. Give it up Panty. NYRaider and Calico have your number. Geez Louise.
Sarasota Raider
SarasotaRaider....
Not much protein in the sandwich...Too bad they don't have any "KoolAid" to wash it down...
My cup runnith over!!!...
Riddle What "NYR"...
What the hell gave you the impression that a normal rebuilding period was a decade...I have no idea how to reply to this let alone figure out the riddle in your head...
"CJ"...
Did we dominate the NFL in the "60"s-"70"s-n-"80"s...
As I remember "GB" dominated the "60"s and "Pitts" dominated the "70"s...The "Midget"s -n- "Skins" -n- "49ers" dominated -w- the Raiders in "SB"s threw the "80"s...
So I don't get the same meaning as you from that motto...Instead what I get is a team who was consistently in contention for supremacy in every decade of their existence...
We made the "PO"s every decade from infancy to now and attended "SB"s in all but one of the 5 decades we have been a team....We lost to "GB" in the 1st decade...We won in the following 2 decades...We failed to achieve a ticket to the big game in our 4th decade but were in contention and in "PO"s for 3/10ths of that period and fighting for a place on that roster for most of the reaming seasons...At the turn of the century we were again a "PO" team and made it to the big dance only to get slapped into total annihilation from wich we have failed to recover....YET!!!...
Sense than we have fallen on bad times to say the least and have been in contention for the bottom of the Abyss with not even the sent of a "PO" birth...But we shall rise again and it is this new decade that beckons to us...
PantyRaider..."2010" Year of The Tiger Will Be Good To MY Team!!!!/_
Post a Comment
<< Home