So here we are...
With one game left in the regular season, the most optimistic view is that the Raiders finish the season at 3-13. While none of us expected a 13-3 season, most were quietly hoping that the Raiders might back into the playoffs at best, or at worst, finish with six wins and strong indications that the team was on the upswing. This is no doubt the worst Raider offensive team that I have witnessed since 1968 when I began following the Raiders. Still, in spite of that, I have been an avid defender of Art Shell and Al Davis. For my efforts, I have been told that I'm a) living in the 1970s, b) have been "drinking the Kool-Aide," and c) too stupid to live.
Instead of casting the blame on Shell and Davis (always the first target of choice), I've placed it where I think it is deserved - circumstances which have created disjointed pieces in any kind of cohesive offensive philosophy. I don't believe the nonsense that Davis selects every pick in the draft (some would hold that Davis makes only the "bad" picks). While it is true that Davis will push for certain players, and will demand a knowledgeable argument from a Head Coach who desires someone else, for the most part coaches select their own players from their first draft onward. After changing Head Coaches with widely differing offensive philosophies six times in ten seasons, the Raiders have created an offensive unit with no glue to hold them together. In this regard they are beginning to resemble the Detroit Lions or the Arizona Cardinals, teams which have followed this pattern for many, many years. I have no doubt that Al Davis is responsible to the extent that he pulled the trigger on each coach, but in two (maybe three) of the cases he simply had no choice.
Countless times I have been told that Al Davis is attempting to relive the 70s. I'd be more inclined to listen to such arguments if the arguments themselves weren't relics of the 70s. I remember them well. "The Raiders will never win a Super Bowl unless Al Davis gives up control of the team." "Madden can't get to the Super Bowl because Al Davis picks his team." "Madden won a Super Bowl because he was successful at simply ignoring Al Davis." We've simply transferred these arguments to each new successful coach. See Tom Flores and Jon Gruden.
I've been told that an owner owes the fans a Super Bowl every year, as amazing as that argument seems. Under that thinking, 30 owners should be forced to sell their team at the end of every season. A team's most honored fans are its season ticket holders. To them an owner owes a team in contention through every home game of the season. That is what a season ticket holder pays for. Al Davis has been more successful at doing this than any other owner for the last four decades, bar none. This is the only four year stretch I can remember that the Raiders played meaningless games on their last home date. 1997, Shell's last year in his first stint, was a successful season on this basis. I believe that if Davis sticks with Shell, the Raiders will have that kind of success next season. If Davis fires Shell, we'll have another roll of the dice. A Head Coach doesn't know the team he has until after his first season. Oh sure, he can gather some knowledge of the talents and athleticism of his players, but he can't know how they will respond under game pressure and seasonal challenges until he's been through at least one season.
Those who are demanding the head of Art Shell are demanding a perpetuation of this problem, cutting the deck in search of an Ace and expecting different results from a dysfunctional group who can't play together, who can't even get along with each other, while the new coach evaluates. Players are beginning to think, "If I can't get the system, who cares? I'll get a different coach after the end of the season, or the season after that." It is apparent to me that Shell has taken the attitude, "This is the system we're going to work with. Get it, or you're gone." If Shell is fired, it sends the message to the current crop of offensive players that the blame for every unsuccessful season will be placed squarely on the shoulders of every departing coach, and the organization is merely waiting for the next messiah. If you want a prescription for discouraging good coaches from coming to the Raiders' organization, that's it.
Coach Shell had an excellent draft in 2006. He focused on the defense. That, coupled with the consistency in coaching of the defensive unit showed marvelous results. With his lower round picks, Shell extracted two young offensive linemen, Boothe and McQuistan, who have developed over the season into keepers. Shell should now be given the chance to focus on the offensive unit, eliminating those players who can't or won't, and replacing them with players who can and will. No one is better capable of doing that right now than Art Shell.
Instead of casting the blame on Shell and Davis (always the first target of choice), I've placed it where I think it is deserved - circumstances which have created disjointed pieces in any kind of cohesive offensive philosophy. I don't believe the nonsense that Davis selects every pick in the draft (some would hold that Davis makes only the "bad" picks). While it is true that Davis will push for certain players, and will demand a knowledgeable argument from a Head Coach who desires someone else, for the most part coaches select their own players from their first draft onward. After changing Head Coaches with widely differing offensive philosophies six times in ten seasons, the Raiders have created an offensive unit with no glue to hold them together. In this regard they are beginning to resemble the Detroit Lions or the Arizona Cardinals, teams which have followed this pattern for many, many years. I have no doubt that Al Davis is responsible to the extent that he pulled the trigger on each coach, but in two (maybe three) of the cases he simply had no choice.
Countless times I have been told that Al Davis is attempting to relive the 70s. I'd be more inclined to listen to such arguments if the arguments themselves weren't relics of the 70s. I remember them well. "The Raiders will never win a Super Bowl unless Al Davis gives up control of the team." "Madden can't get to the Super Bowl because Al Davis picks his team." "Madden won a Super Bowl because he was successful at simply ignoring Al Davis." We've simply transferred these arguments to each new successful coach. See Tom Flores and Jon Gruden.
I've been told that an owner owes the fans a Super Bowl every year, as amazing as that argument seems. Under that thinking, 30 owners should be forced to sell their team at the end of every season. A team's most honored fans are its season ticket holders. To them an owner owes a team in contention through every home game of the season. That is what a season ticket holder pays for. Al Davis has been more successful at doing this than any other owner for the last four decades, bar none. This is the only four year stretch I can remember that the Raiders played meaningless games on their last home date. 1997, Shell's last year in his first stint, was a successful season on this basis. I believe that if Davis sticks with Shell, the Raiders will have that kind of success next season. If Davis fires Shell, we'll have another roll of the dice. A Head Coach doesn't know the team he has until after his first season. Oh sure, he can gather some knowledge of the talents and athleticism of his players, but he can't know how they will respond under game pressure and seasonal challenges until he's been through at least one season.
Those who are demanding the head of Art Shell are demanding a perpetuation of this problem, cutting the deck in search of an Ace and expecting different results from a dysfunctional group who can't play together, who can't even get along with each other, while the new coach evaluates. Players are beginning to think, "If I can't get the system, who cares? I'll get a different coach after the end of the season, or the season after that." It is apparent to me that Shell has taken the attitude, "This is the system we're going to work with. Get it, or you're gone." If Shell is fired, it sends the message to the current crop of offensive players that the blame for every unsuccessful season will be placed squarely on the shoulders of every departing coach, and the organization is merely waiting for the next messiah. If you want a prescription for discouraging good coaches from coming to the Raiders' organization, that's it.
Coach Shell had an excellent draft in 2006. He focused on the defense. That, coupled with the consistency in coaching of the defensive unit showed marvelous results. With his lower round picks, Shell extracted two young offensive linemen, Boothe and McQuistan, who have developed over the season into keepers. Shell should now be given the chance to focus on the offensive unit, eliminating those players who can't or won't, and replacing them with players who can and will. No one is better capable of doing that right now than Art Shell.
posted by BlandaRocked at 9:45 AM
6 Comments:
BR: Nice post. Interesting and certainly a plausible side of the story. However, my biggest fear is that Shell really doesn't have "a system" and that a true direction doesn't exist, which is particularly evident by his replacing Walsh.
I don't completely dislike Shell as a coach. My knock on Shell is the exact same problem we all witnessed in his first stint as HC, i.e., he doesn't appear involved on the sidelines during a game. He relies so much on his assistants to perform during games that he isn’t much more than a ghost on the sideline. With the caliber of offensive coaching and player performances I’ve seen this year, Shell can’t afford that luxury.
I agree that replacing Shell is just a roll of the dice at this point, but we need a coach that can manage games for us. Otherwise, we will continue to be out-coached and out-played by our opponents. I firmly believe that in order for the Raiders to be successful under Shell, he will have improve his own coaching skills and become more involved in game management.
I'm not sure that Shell is that passive. I haven't been to any games this season, but I've seen shots of him talking to both players and assistants. I do know that I always saw him talking to people in his first stint.
But he is always calm - deadly calm. That's his style, and every coach's style is different. Tom Landry always stood emotionless, and expressionless on the sidelines, and was famous for that. Nobody ever called him a bad coach because of it.
There is one other factor here which needs to be considered. This is Shell's evaluation year. He's not going to fully understand the teams' weaknesses if he isn't carefully watching the game on the field. And you can get a far better impression of a team by watching them up close and personal rather than on film.
My impression is that if he survives as coach, he'll be more willing to consult on the sidelines rather than watching every play next season. This was different in his first stint because he'd already been with the team as offensive line coach.
BR - A very intersting post.
I was expecting a 3-5 game improvement this year based on an improved defense, running game, offensive line, plus the subtraction of KFC.
Most of us who have followed the Raiders figured that Shell's knowledge of blocking & committment to a power rushing attack would equate to a stellar running game.
The biggest disappointment for me this season has been the lack of committment to the running game and how our offensive line has performed under Shell. I sincerely believed that by the 8th week of the season that the rushing attack would be clicking which in turn would be setting up the play action pass and deep ball.
I do believe that the lion's share of blame for this year's failures should fall on Shell and Davis' shoulders.
In terms of acquiring and assembling the personnel, Davis does in fact make the draft pick selections with input from his staff and HC. He also is responsible for all the trades and free agent acquisitions.
I think Davis has done well with some of the defensive selections (draft and free agency) over the past 4 years (to his credit) and done very poorly with the offensive selections (to his blame).
On the defensive side of the ball, Burgess and Sapp were good free agent signings. Huff, Howard, Asomugha, Washington, Morrison were solid choices.
On the offensive side of the ball, Collins, Jordan, Moss, Brooks turned out to be bad signings. Gallery and Grove have been draft day disappointments.
The disjointed philosophies of the various coaches over the past 10 seasons falls on Davis because ultimately he picked each HC. White, Bugel, and Callahan were not HC material to begin with and were obviously bad choices by Davis. The 2 most important decisions that an owner makes are the selection of his HC and QB. The owner, HC, and QB are the key men in positions of leadership. Our HC and QB carousel has been spinning around with mostly misses the past 10+ years excluding the stretch where we had Gruden/Gannon in place. Whether it is drafting a QB or signing a QB in free agency, this falls on Davis.
As far as Shell, he has been at fault for selecting Walsh as his OC and Slater as his O-Line coach. If the HC is going to delegate responsibility (ie. playcalling & coaching), then it stands to reason that you need to have competent coaches to handle these responsibilities. Clearly Walsh and Slater are not up to the task. The implementation of systems, philosophies, playcalling, and use of personnel starts and ends with Shell. For example, if Shell wants to be committed to a rushing attack, he needs to communicate this to Shoop. As HC, Shell is the man in charge. If adjustments need to be made during a game or throughout the season, Shell is responsible.
The other 2 major areas of concern are Shell's ability to manage the game and manage his personnel. Maximizing your personnel's talents through motivation, leadership, and acumen is the #1 responsibility of any NFL HC.
If Shell is brought back next season, he will need to demonstrate an vastly improved ability to reach his players by communicating more directly and effectively. He will need to show the same fight and determination that he was known for on the playing field. As HC he can't afford the luxury of taking a "hands-off" approach. Shell needs to be intimately involved in game day decisions, personnel decisions, adjustments, and strategy. This means communicating with players and coaches on the sidelines and your OC in the press box.
A stoic, hands-off HC might work for a well oiled machine but it certainly won't work with the worst Raider team of all time. At this point in time a dynamic HC is required. From week 1 to week 16 there has been no improvement whatosever in the teams offensive
performance. My gut feeling tells me that if Shell returns then it will be absolutely imperative to hire a hot-shot, innovative, dymamic OC to turn this offensive mess around.
Calico:
Wow! You're getting as long winded as I am. ;-)
We still disagree on many points. But before starting this new year I want to tell you that I greatly respect your opinions and your commitment to the Raider Nation. Time will show us who was right and who was wrong, but being right or wrong is far less important than Raider victories.
Being Raider Nation brothers is far more important than our diagreements, because, ultimately, we just want the same thing. I will say that in such a disappointing season, my greatest pleasure has been our one on one in debate.
PantyRaider:
It's a pleasure to be on the same crew. Your posts are a lot of fun.
Happy New Year to both of you, and your families, and to the entire Raider Nation!
BR - Glad that we can agree to disagree and I sincerely wish you the best in the new year. For the record, I don't believe that there is necessarily one "right" way or one "wrong" way of viewing the Raiders current dilemma.
One point that I disagree with you about is the significance of the 1st year under a new HC.
I wholeheartedly don't think the 1st year should be used to comfortably sit back and passively evaluate the players ... Try telling that to 1st year HC Eric Mangini or Sean Payton!
Saints 2005: 3-13
Saints 2006: 10-5
Jets 2005: 4-12
Jets 2006: 9-6
Raiders 2005: 4-12
Raiders 2006: 2-13
My expectations as a Raider fan:
#1 I want Al Davis to assemble and acquire the best possible players and coaches.
#2: I want Art Shell (or any Raider HC) to motivate and manage the personnel ... putting the best players on the field in the best possible position to win each and every game.
#3: I want the players to be completely dedicated to their craft and be passionate about doing whatever it takes to win.
Are these expectations so unreasonable? :)
May your New Year be bright and full of promise, BlandaRocked.
Best Regards,
Calico Jack
Calico:
We really don't disagree regarding a 1st year HC in most circumstances. But the situation with Shell is slightly different, as he hasn't been coaching since 2002.
In fact, you've put your finger on the one major trepidation I had about Walsh, and the lesser one involving Shell. I did feel that not being "on the field" for a period of time was a disadvantage. The longer the time away, the larger the disadvantage. The speed of the game is entirely different on film than "up close and personal."
This is another reason why I think that Shell will be much better next year.
Post a Comment
<< Home