BlandaRocked

Al Davis & the Raiders

2008-03-01T17:46:00.000-08:00

“One unsubstantiated story is meaningless, but put them all together and it’s true!” – Stephen Colbert

I’m not buying into the Davis/Kiffin story as it’s been told in the media. There has been absolutely nothing to provide substance, and the story is only advanced by the winks and nods of approving dittoheads caught up in the Jim Rome mentality of the modern sports media. If you can’t be so offensive as to convince someone to physically assault you, what you have to say doesn’t matter. But this is a commentary on Al Davis, not the media.

Bias

First, let’s get my biases out of the way so you’ll understand my philosophical location. I’ve been a staunch Raider fan since the late 1960s. When I moved to Los Angeles in the late 1970s, the Raiders followed me there. When I returned to the Bay Area in the early 1990s, the Raiders followed me home. I’ve often said that no team owner has shown so much devotion to one fan.

In those forty years I’ve come to understand a few things. It is not that Al Davis exists because of the Raiders, the Raiders exist because of Al Davis. I’ve come to understand, also, that I have more great football memories that any one football fan is entitled to. Al Davis is the man most responsible for those memories, and that buys more loyalty from me than a 19-61 run can take away. As far as I’m concerned, Al Davis has earned the right to do anything with his team that he wants. It is his, more than it belongs to the Raider Nation. He has done me the honor of renting, or lending the team to me on lazy autumn Sundays for forty years. I am obligated to return it when I’m finished with it.

It is not enough to say that the Raiders exist because of Al Davis. They are intertwined. It is impossible to imagine one without the other. And yet, that must eventually be so. Either that or the Raiders must fold shop when Davis is gone. I have watched Al Davis long enough to know that he believes that as long as the Raiders exist, Davis will be immortal.

That said…

Some seem to believe that Davis would destroy his team for his own aggrandizement. That is not possible. The only aggrandizement for Davis is the success of the Raiders. He wants the legacy to continue for all time. Currently he is attempting to restore his team again by the force of his will, as he once willed his wife to survive a stroke. Once that was possible, and even if it still is, soon enough it will no longer be so.

Over forty years of lazy media coverage, the opinion seems to be firmly entrenched that Al Davis controls all things associated with the Raiders. That used to be so, and to a certain extent it still is, but not in the way many think. Al Davis likes to surround himself with excellent football minds. He doesn’t want “yes” men. He wants people to disagree with him and to present alternative view points. That presents Davis with options, and from those options he makes his decisions. The notion that Davis does not listen to his coaches on draft day and during free agency is absurd. If the coach fails to provide input to Davis, in Davis’ mind the coach is not doing his job. Davis will sometimes go in his own direction if he feels that arguments to the contrary have been lacking. The fact is, Davis relies on his coaches now more than ever.

The notion that there is only one boss at Raiders HQ is absolutely true. Davis built the franchise according to his youthful vision of what a professional football dynasty should be. Davis created a franchise where he is the central brain trust, and he delegates to others as he would to his arms and legs. The delegates have no specified duties. Rather they do whatever Davis tells them needs to be done, or they suggest ideas to Davis who will delegate if the idea is approved. In the earlier days Davis was regularly on the practice field, coaching players and offering them career advice. He would sit in the owner’s box and send instructions to his head coach on the field. He negotiated contracts according to his own philosophies of duties and obligations to labor. He placed himself at the center of NFL committees. He was constantly moving around the country, scouting players and teams.

Through all of this time, the team has never suffered because of that level of Davis’ involvement. Rather, it has suffered for the lack of it.

It has been said that the Raiders will win if they model themselves after the successful plan of the Patriots. Not true. The Patriots did not invent a decade of success for an NFL franchise. It has been done before, and by teams who operated far differently. Teams find such levels of success through a combination of hard work, good luck, and coalescing circumstances. You don’t win the Super Bowl in the off and preseason, you merely build the foundation that allows you to reach out and take it if it presents itself. The combinations of coalescing circumstances, that get a team to the final victory circle, are as different, as varied, and as changing as the moon.

The most successful years for the Raiders were the years between 1975 and 1985. In that time, with two different starting quarterbacks, and two different head coaches, they won three Super Bowls for two different cities. What team of any decade can match that? This was also a time where the team benefited by Davis’ “constant interference.” One needs to examine Raider history a bit.

From the late 60s to the early 80s, Al Davis was a force of nature. All day he was in his office, on the practice field, in a meeting room, scouting, writing contracts… All night he was on the phone or watching film. It is not a coincidence that it was over this period that the dynasty was built. Al Davis structured a franchise that required the 24/7 involvement of its Managing General Partner, both in football operations and in the business office. For about 15 years Al Davis satisfied those requirements completely and unequivocally. He kept things internal to draw off of the experience that he gave people. He promoted internally to preserve “the Raider way.” Both John Madden and Tom Flores cut their teeth under Davis. They not only operated effectively in his system, they thrived.

Father time is not a forgiving patriarch. The NFL has become vastly more complicated, as has business in general. Don’t tell me that these complexities have passed Al Davis by. They haven’t. But they do require more time.

After the Raiders moved to Los Angeles, Davis, by necessity, began to spend a good deal of his time in court. After successfully suing the NFL, Davis had to deal with the fact that the LA Coliseum Commission fully breached their contract with him. Because of that breach, Davis spent much additional time looking for a final home for the franchise. Davis attempted to get his own stadium built in Los Angeles (more time), which was shut down by the NFL. He negotiated a move to Oakland (more time), and then immediately sued the NFL for breaking up his stadium deal. He was simultaneously sued by the City of Oakland on the ridiculous premise that Davis intended to turn around and move right back.

On top of this are the basic issues that none of us can escape over time. My father who is 89 became ill last year. Making sure that all his needs were met was a full time job in itself. Davis had his wife nearly die from a stroke which requires years of rehabilitation for a survivor. Davis is 79, and at 54 I know I don’t move from one thing to the next nearly as fast as when I was in my forties. If Davis can’t manage all of these things, in addition to the structured requirements of his franchise, it is not because he’s too old or because the game has passed him by. It is simply because there are not enough hours in a day to complete his daily tasks. As a result, he’s removed himself from the practice field and other areas where he feels he can reasonably delegate.

Since the delegates don’t have clearly defined roles in this structure, and since Davis has been absent more than in the past, team executives are sometimes forced by necessity or ambition to define their own roles. This leads to political gamesmanship, power struggles, and lost direction. This leads to the Lombardi/Shell fiasco of last season.

Coaching

When Davis began to get distracted in the early 1980s, Tom Flores was the head coach and long time Raider insider. Still, Flores suffered in his final years with Davis’ lack of involvement. The Raiders seemed stagnant. It was at this point that Davis’ hires began to lose direction, define their own roles, and slow team development with in-fighting and politics. Davis addressed the issue by hiring Mike Shanahan, but with Davis spending less time with the team, Shanahan began recreating the Raiders in the image of the 49ers. The old insiders objected and didn’t trust Shanahan, creating a situation where Davis eventually had to step in. So he fired Shanahan and promoted Shell.

Shell was a good caretaker, and a leader the team respected, but he was not known as a football strategist. As Shell made new coaching hires, and with the influx of players from other teams, there was more in-fighting and more self definition. Mike White, simultaneous with the team’s return to Oakland, politicked Shell out in a coup.

After two seasons and a record of 15-17 for White, Davis turned to the players’ favorite, Joe Bugel. Bugel was in over his head, attempting to determine how Davis would coach the team, rather than look to his own philosophies. And from the end of Flores to the beginning of Gruden, the Raiders were beset by internal squabbles and power grabs. Fortunately with Gruden came Bruce Allen. Allen was well known and trusted inside the Raider organization because of his long standing ties between football families. When Allen defined his own role, nobody objected. The friendship that developed between Gruden and Allen served them and the team very well.

Let there be no mistake. Gruden left on his own volition. He was presented with being able to be a head coach in his home town instead of 3,000 miles from his friends and family. He was offered added authority, the ability to hire his own family members, and a big raise. Davis may have been able to match the money, but he wasn’t ready to offer more power and he couldn’t offer a greater proximity to family and friends. Any of us in Gruden’s situation would have gone the same way, and Al was well aware that he couldn’t keep Gruden here without offering at least more power and money than Tampa Bay, who heaped power and wealth on Gruden as though he were the second coming. Davis, then, got what he could for his team. Unfortunately, Allen, who had developed a stronger relationship with Gruden than with Davis, followed his friend to Tamp Bay. He had been the only man since the late 1980s that could create structure where none was given.

Enter both personalities of Bill Callahan. Enter the friendly passivity of Norv Turner. Enter the forgotten Shell. Enter 2007. Davis’ plate was fuller by the day, leaving no guiding hand in place. Each coach determined his own needs simply by gauging Davis’ reaction to their suggestion. Each coach was looking to find structure that only Al could provide. There was no focus on long term team needs, only focus on whatever the coach needed at the moment.

The New England Patriots find more success from their players because they have a single offensive system in place that works. The Patriots fill their roster with players capable of simply being plugged into their system. This works for about a decade or more, until there are too few available players to fill the roles required, then a team must rebuild again, both its system and personnel. This was also true for the Raiders when they were doing the same thing.

What has been sorely lacking with the Oakland Raiders over the last seven years is the consistency of making moves with a long term plan and a guiding hand that is ever present. The first priority in changing that is finding stability at the position of head coach. Priority number two, which must immediately follow the first, is finding someone to replace Bruce Allen and it must be someone that Davis trusts implicitly. It must be someone who can make structure where none exists.

From this point forward, every move that Al Davis makes, regarding the Raiders, must be in furtherance of a plan, with Davis’ stamp but without Davis’ physical presence, that keeps this team in Super Bowl contention for the decades to come. Otherwise the Raiders, after Al Davis’ passing, will resemble something of the demise of the Hindenburg.

Over the years, part of what has made the Raiders so entertaining to me is the personal side of their story. In spite of the losing, I’m still entertained. I have faith in Al Davis to figure out how he will exit this life, just as he figured out how to live it.

The story of Al Davis and the Raiders must end in triumph or tragedy. There is no middle ground. And for Al Davis, that is how it should be. To those who have become Raider fans in fairly recent history, and who only know Davis by what the media reports, the final chapter in this legend should be the most exciting chapter of all. Those who are demanding changes will get more than they asked for over the next five years. The stakes have become incredibly high, but going “all in” on a hand of Texas Hold ‘em has never reduced the interest in the game.

Why Daunte?

2007-09-24T15:00:00.000-07:00

In 1973 the Raiders got off to a shaky start. The Raiders were becoming perennial playoff participants in part because of Daryle Lamonica's deep ball prowess. But in 1973 the Raiders seemed to have hit a road block. Lamonica had no problem moving the team between the 20 yard lines, but once in the red zone they were repeatedly settling for Blanda kicks. Ultimately the problem was resolved by replacing Lamonica with Kenny Stabler. To the fore, Stabler brought his talent as a skilled play caller on late drives and uncanny accuracy in the 10 to 20 yard range. It was the mid range accuracy that brought the Raiders out of their early season doldrums in 1973.

I bring this up because of the current similarity in the debate between Josh McCown and Daunte Culpepper. While many would be inclined to compare McCown with Stabler and Culpepper with Lamonica, it is, in fact, the other way around. It is the mid range accuracy which is key. Inside the red zone the deep ball is no longer an issue. Defenses don't have to worry about it, and offensive receivers can only hope to get so much distance between themselves and defenders. For that reason the defense can focus more on the run, and that is what makes working inside the red zone its own special problem.

Josh McCown is an excellent game manager with superior athleticism. McCown is going to run any offensive play that's sent him with near perfection, and that is why he's received Kiffin's preference. But the Raiders are not currently very effective inside the red zone, particularly against the Browns where they had to settle for three Janokowski field goals.

When defenses confront McCown in the red zone, they know that McCown is going to run any play well and call the correct audible if need be. McCown, however, is not that accurate. It's not that he has poor accuracy, it's just very average. Defenses know that they have to keep reasonably close to receivers, but they can play those receivers loose enough to focus on the run. McCown is a smart player, so he will not throw a pass to a receiver who is closely blanketed. McCown, lacking other options, will throw that ball away.

Daunte Culpepper, on the other hand, is extremely accurate both intermediate and deep. He has a live arm, and can rifle passes into receivers. Culpepper has been known to continuously fire passes into receivers who are being blanketed by throwing so that the receiver is always between the ball and the defender, thereby making it so only the intended receiver has a chance to catch the ball. If the defender tries to go over the top or through the intended receiver, it will generally result in a pass interference call, putting the ball at the 1 yard line with first down and goal to go.

That's the relevant difference. When opposing teams are confronted with McCown in the red zone, they know they have to watch the play and stay with it, but they can afford to play their backfield loose, and focus on the run. Confronted with Daunte Culpepper, they have to blanket the receivers while leaving enough at the line of scrimmage to stop the run. That last is a very difficult proposition with Jordan currently playing so well.

And this is why we need to stay with Daunte now that he's broken the ice.

A "Dear JaMarcus" letter...

2007-08-17T09:18:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Russell:

So I issued my best welcome (see previous post) and you throw it back in my face. Thirty plus million dollars in guaranteed money along with a six year, sixty million dollar contract - more money given to any other rookie in NFL history - is beneath you.

In fairness, I'm not certain that last sentence is entirely justifiable. My position remains that you hired agents to get the job done and you must follow their advice, even though that advice seems to be piss poor. They've already cost you money, Mr. Russell. A lot of money! Showing off your live arm at Raider camp would have earned you promotional endorsements worth millions. Not now, Mr. Russell. Now you're actually going to have to earn those dollars with performance before some corporation is willing to put your face on their cereal box.

The fact is that Al Davis has a reputation for paying players what they are worth. Even when he's up against cap constraints he has found ways to allocate the money to players who've earned it. He does have a reputation for low balling contracts, but not player contracts. If he underpays, he underpays his coaches. At least that's his reputation. Once coaches have proven themselves, he rewards them with their subsequent contract (usually choosing not to negotiate again until the contract has, or nearly has expired). I think I can safely bet everything I have that, no matter what, Davis would be willing to make you the highest paid player in football history without ever having set your foot on an NFL playing field. And yet, for your agents (and apparently you) that is not enough.

So now, Mr. Russell you wait. We (the Raider Nation) don't wait. We carefully watch the improvement of Andrew Walter, the mobility of Josh McCown, and the reemergence of Dante Culpepper. You begin to fade, in our minds, into an irritable memory.

You (and I say "you" because your agents do represent "you") seem to feel that you have earned far more than the purely insane amount of money you've been offered. Really? How, exactly, did you earn it? By proving that you could play two years of college ball? Well, there are others who have played great for four years of college and flopped in the pros. You have yet to prove to anybody that won't happen to you, but your agents seem to feel (you by extension) that whether or not you flop, you've still earned the money, even if you just show up at the facility to sign autographs. In other words, your mere presence on our practice fields should earn you that money.

At this point I'm pretty confident that Davis has decided he's offered enough for the privilege of your company, and is willing to let you sit out the season. I know that many of my fellow Raider fans will disagree, but for my part, we're in a better position than we imagined. We don't need you. Stay home and squander what you could have made without the desire to be unaccountable. Somebody will pay you millions next year, but not as many millions, and that collar you'll feel around your neck will be attached to a very short leash. I believe that Mr. Davis drew his line in the sand when he said he thought that Dante Culpepper was a lot like Jim Plunkett. He just might be right. And if he is, expect to be playing for a different team next year and for a lot less money.

As it turns out our second round pick might have been really worth a top pick. Miller signed, showed up in camp, and appears to be the best tight end that the Raiders have had since the 1980s. With time to throw, Andrew Walter is looking more like the quarterback the Raiders drafted than the stranger who played last year while being buried under an ineffective offensive line. McCown is showing leadership and mobility, Culpepper is showing both mobility and a powerful arm. Our offensive line has improved, our running game… Yes, we'll lose our first ever #1 overall pick. Big deal. The NFL busts at that position are legion. We'll save the obscene amount of money you're demanding, and Mr. Davis has never had a problem with acquiring extra draft picks when we've needed them. We're going to be better this year with or with you. You had a great opportunity which you seem to have squandered.

So you seem to be reduced to a couple of choices. Sit out the season in Alabama and contemplate your navel and things that might have been, or fire your agents, wait the required amount of time, hire a new agent and tell him/her to get the deal done. At this point, five days isn't going to make a hell of a lot difference. The moment where five days would have made a difference is already past.

Sincerely,
BlandaRocked

An open letter to JaMarcus Russell

2007-05-03T11:19:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Russell:

As a voluntary minicamp is opening for the Raiders this weekend, I thought perhaps someone might set you up on-line while you're in town, and maybe you'd have occasion to see this. I hope that you do. No doubt other members of the Raider family will add their thoughts to the comments below.

Welcome to Oakland, the birth place of the Raider Nation. When you have a few days off, take a look around and experience the beauty, the magic, and the excitement that is the San Francisco Bay area. Nearby the Raiders' headquarters is a place that many refer to as McAfee Coliseum. We, of the Raider Nation, refer to it as Mecca, the Black Hole, or the HOT (coined by the great announcer, Bill King, as Al Davis' House of Thrills).

While working at the Raider facility you will encounter legends of the game who played before you were born. You will meet Jim Otto, Jim Plunkett, Fred Biletnicoff, Jack Tatum, Kenny Stabler, George Atkinson, Tom Flores, and more, too numerous to name. Honor them, and give them your respect. On their shoulders, everything around you has been built. Someday soon, when you put on the Silver and Black and walk out onto the turf of the House of Thrills, they will become your second family. They will be your new grandfathers, fathers, and uncles. You will have been given the honor only given to a happy few, the opportunity to become one of them.

I hope you will take the time to learn about the rich history of the Oakland Raiders. And, in the mean time, we have rested much weight upon your shoulders. We would not have done so without being firm in the belief that such weight is rightly placed. I would like to tell you a story of legends past, and if you remember it, you will do well.

The House of Thrills was the sight of a game many consider to be the most exciting football game in the history of the NFL. It was a playoff game in 1974. John Madden was our head coach, and Kenny Stabler was our quarterback. In 1973, the Miami Dolphins had posted the NFL's only undefeated season. In 1974, the Dolphins were attempting to appear in their 4th straight Super Bowl and to win their 3rd straight.

With the HOT filled to the rafters with Raider fanatics waving black socks, the game began with a 93 yard kick off return by the Dolphins, and the two teams battled each other for the changing lead the entire game. Finally, with time down to just over 2 minutes in the 4th quarter, the Dolphins powered over the Raider goal line for a 5 point lead. It looked like Miami was on its way to another Super Bowl, and the Raiders were on their way home.

Stabler and company took over deep in their own territory, but Stabler was the master (some say the inventor) of the two minute drill. And Stabler proceeded to pick the Dolphin defense apart. Stabler worked through his receivers, going left and right, working his way past mid field, with time falling below one minute. Stabler called a time out and came to the sideline to talk to John Madden. Madden hadn't signaled for Stabler to call the time out, and when Stabler arrived on the sideline Madden waited to hear what he had to say. When he got to the sideline, Stabler looked up to the stands surrounding the field and surveyed the Raider Nation. Then he looked at Madden and said, "they're getting their money's worth today, aren't they, Coach." Then he turned and went back to the huddle.

Finally, with only a handful of seconds on the clock, and on 4th down with the Raiders near the Dolphin 5 yard line, Stabler dropped back to take one last shot at the end zone. With nobody open, he decided to run for it. A defensive player on the ground reached up and caught him by one ankle. On his way down, Stabler looked to the end zone and threw like throwing the shot put into a "sea of hands." Standing on the goal line, and surrounded by Dolphins, HB Clarence Davis' hands prevailed as he fell backward into the end zone with the winning touchdown.

"Great victory," you're thinking, "but what's the point of the story?"

The point is this. In a playoff atmosphere, with the entire season and the history of the franchise on the line, nobody more clearly understood the "bottom line" as clearly as Ken Stabler. "They're getting their money's worth today, aren't they Coach." A football game is not an earth shattering event. Nobody will live or die based on the outcome of a Raider game. Football is, after all, entertainment. That said, football is not unimportant.

The Raider Nation, just like fans of any other team, go to a game to forget all of those things that ARE life and death to them. They seek to blanket the stress of their lives, momentarily, behind a symbolic struggle. They seek to find from the game an example of tenacity as an example for themselves. The game teaches them to never give up until their time has run out, until their last second has run off the clock.

Such is the example that you must set for your teammates and the Raider Nation. Such is the Raider way, the Raider tradition. No matter how poorly we seem to be managing things, no matter the odds against us, no matter our fears, we WILL prevail and only the death of time will defeat us. If you set this example, we will love you for it, and we will never forget you. Wherever you go, whatever you do, you will always be a member of our international family. You will walk among legends.

Now, get your contracts signed, and let's have some fun.

The Will To Win

2007-03-16T10:00:00.000-07:00

Each Super Bowl quarterback for the Raiders had his own special quality.

Lamonica had a rifle for an arm. Powerful and accurate. He earned the name, "The Mad Bomber." Opposing defenses weren't safe no matter where the Raiders began a drive on the field. If the Raiders were down by a touchdown or less, and the Raiders had the ball at midfield with only a couple of ticks on the clock, one always expected that Lamonica was about to make the game winning play by throwing a strike into the end zone.

Stabler, who earned the name "Snake" from his scrambling high school years, was a crafty leader and a born winner. He was deadly accurate on short to intermediate passes, often completing over 70% of his throws. While not accurate deep, he still had the mental acuity to throw the deep ball in such a way as to position the ball so that the receiver was always between the ball and the defender. Ultimately, with Stabler, the game always hinged on his will to win. Even on his worst days, he would intelligently probe the defense for the key to success.

Plunkett, known affectionately as "Plunk," was a supreme field leader. He was soft spoken with a deep ball arm. He had surprising escapability. But the most amazing thing about Plunkett was his ability to know, at all times, where every player was on the field. No Raider quarterback was better at finding the open man and hitting him in stride.

Gannon was the consummate perfectionist. He insisted that receivers run their routs to perfection, and was always aware of the percentage play. Lacking a deep ball arm he was the perfect quarterback for the Gruden philosophy that "three things can happen when you throw the ball deep, and two of them are bad." The best description of Gannon is "demanding leader."

Of this quartet, I used to waiver between Stabler and Plunkett as my favorites. Plunkett, because he was the classic underdog. So many times he had been counted out and left for dead, only to come back and win two Super Bowls. Stabler, for his ability to find a way to win. I loved them both, but I think Stabler stands slightly above.

I remember a Monday night game in New Orleans. The Raiders were down by four touchdowns late in the 2nd quarter. Stabler dropped back to pass and was brutally swarmed over and sacked. He got up slowly, and the camera focused on his face. "Dandy Don" Meredith, in the MNF booth said something along the lines of, "Oh, oh. I've seen that look in Stabler's eyes before. He's going to make some trouble for the Saints before this game is over." Stabler led the team back to a 35-28 victory. At the time, it was the biggest comeback victory in MNF history.

In San Diego, needing a touchdown to win with only time and downs for one more play and Stabler half way to the ground on a sack, Stabler fumbled the ball forward. His teammates directed the fumble to the end zone where it was covered by Dave Casper. (The Holy Roller Play) In Oakland during the '73 playoffs against the world champion Miami Dolphins - The Sea of Hands play! In Oakland, against the NE Patriots in 1976, same situation again, but this time Stabler ran on shaky knees and dove head first into the end zone.

"Down two touchdowns or up two touchdowns, he's the same quarterback.... he is convinced that his next play will be his best play. Soaking up a record-setting day or suffering through a forgettable day, he still wants the ball at the end.

"I've always believed that you measure a quarterback on his bad days, not his good days. When you're not having your best day, how do you respond? Can you stay into it and manage the game? ...if something went wrong or if he messed something up...he would usually get another chance. If he got that ball at the end of the game, he was going to beat your tail -- and he knew it."

The above would be an excellent comment in regards to Stabler, if it were, in fact, about him. But it is about someone else who was not, and is not a Raider. At least not yet. The quote is from Jimbo Fisher, the former offensive coordinator from LSU. He is talking, of course, about JaMarcus Russell.

From all I have seen on film clips and television, from all that I've heard from his coaches, his teammates, and his fans, JaMarcus Russell is Ken Stabler with Lamonica's arm and the blossoming bud of Plunkett leadership. He has successfully undertaken every instruction from every coach he's had. He listens and he learns, so Gannon's perfectionism may well be on the horizon.

Al Davis... Lane Kiffin... Do you want more Super Bowls? We need to draft this quarterback.

Time will tell...

2007-02-22T11:46:00.000-08:00

So Jerry Porter is switching his number and attitude to Tim Brown's. When Porter came to the Raiders as a receiver with great potential, Tim Brown took Porter under his wing and taught Porter how to control his receiving patterns and his attitude. Make no mistake, the attitude fell apart in 2006. It is not the prerogative of a receiver to dictate to the owner, the head coach, or the receivers coach what offense will be run. In February of 2006, those who make such decisions decided on a plan. It was Jerry Porter's job to carry out his part of that plan to the best of his ability. There is little question in my mind that had Porter done his job, and Moss his, the Raiders would have had about four more wins under their belts.

Still, we are likely better off for the way things have turned out. With those four more wins, we'd still have Art Shell and a very long road in front of us. While I have great respect for Shell as a player and a coach, his greatest weakness is his lack of anticipation for how players, not familiar with him, will perceive him. If Shell had started the 2006 season earlier, and made more of an effort to sell himself and his philosophy to his players, there might have been far less communication breakdowns in Raider ranks. If Kiffin does nothing else, he has proved this a little more every day since his hiring. Claims that the prevailing problem was Al Davis' cluelessness should be completely shattered. Davis spoke directly to this exact issue the day of Kiffin's introductory press conference.

According to Tim Brown, Porter's mentor and confidant, Kiffin has told Brown that the Kiffin offense is based primarily on Jon Gruden's offense. Again shattering perceptions on how Al Davis felt about Jon Gruden and about what we think Davis prefers to see in a Raider offense. I assure you that the one primary quality of an offense for Al Davis must be that it is a winning offense. "Just win, baby!" Do whatever it takes. Still, Kiffin appears to have added his own wrinkles. Gruden felt that on every long pass, three things can happen and two of them are bad. Kiffin loves to throw in the deep shot in order to spread the defense and to keep them off balance. Because of this, Kiffin requires deep ball receivers - guys with the speed to get past the corners, the height to out jump them, the hands to pull the ball in, and the muscle to hang on to it. Outside of Doug Gabriel, Porter and Moss are really the only receivers with such credentials.

It speaks well of Lane Kiffin that (at least evident from Porter's brief statement in a press release) Porter promises a new start, and a new attitude. Porter claims to look forward to putting the past behind. Significantly, Porter has chosen Tim Brown's number for his own. Porter indicates (and Brown backs it up) that Porter's intent is to emulate Brown in team leadership and work ethic. Is Porter capable of such a conversion? Time will tell.

As for Moss? Tim Brown seems to feel that Moss' lack of production in 2006 was more a matter of ability than attitude. Brown is of the opinion, based on information he gets from players who still play against Moss, that Moss has lost a step - that his skills are declining rapidly. On this, I disagree with Brown. It would be one thing were it evident that Moss was trying but failing. What I noticed was his distinct lack of effort. He didn't fight for the ball (one of his career trademarks), and frequently didn't stretch out to make catches. Frequently he stood by while balls were being picked off by the defender right in front of him. My opinion of Moss is that once it became evident that the Raiders were not going to be competitive, Moss took the rest of the season off.

Between Moss and Porter, I prefer Porter's circumstances to Moss'. Porter was mainly not on the field, but Moss was a starter with a team (a "brotherhood of men," as Mr. Sapp once put it) relying on his efforts. While Porter may have disrespected the Raider's coach and their fans, Moss disrespected the coaches, the fans, and his teammates. He hung his team members out to dry with his lack of effort. As a player, I would be reluctant to have Moss come back on the field. As a fan, I would be reluctant to pay for a ticket to watch him. As a coach, I would be reluctant to depend on Moss to carry out my design. But according to an ESPN radio interview with Kiffin, Moss is also now on board and looks forward to starting a new season. Earlier, at the Senior Bowl, we heard that Kiffin had approached Moss and had been rebuffed. Has the situation changed? Were the rumors from the Senior Bowl ever true? Or is Kiffin simply trying to boost Moss' trade value? Judging by the words I've heard come out of Kiffin's mouth, that his players will be on board and that they will "play happy," I have to lean in the direction that Kiffin has been able to sell Moss on the new program. Are Moss' low 2006 numbers a sign of a poor attitude, or a sign of declining skills. Time will tell.

If neither Porter or Moss are now "trade bate," our draft structure appears to have evolved. If we keep Moss, we no longer have the use of him to increase draft choices or to use him to move up the ladder in any particular round. This makes the successful use of our #1 pick somewhat more critical. Trade the first pick? Pull the trigger on Jamarcus Russell, a run stuffer on the defensive line, a running back, an O-line stud? My choice would still be to pull the trigger on JRus, but I'm less certain now that the Raiders will do that. Whatever the Raiders decide to do, we can expect to see them make a number of inquiries about veteran quarterbacks. Which quarterbacks they inquire about will likely signal what they have in mind for the #1 pick. Whether they decide to draft JRus or not, I believe they will retain the #1 pick, and not trade down. But if the Raiders make serious inquiries as to the availability of David Carr, I believe that Russell will not play for the Raiders. If the Raiders make inquiries about Huard in KC, I believe that will be because they are looking for the temporary stop gap while they groom a franchise quarterback.

Andrew Walter? I don't believe that the Raiders will go into the season with him as their only choice as a starter since Tui is all but gone and Brooks has been released. I feel the Raiders only have one of two choices. Either bring in an experienced young veteran for a long term solution and give Walter the chance to compete, or to bring in JRus and an older experienced quarterback to help groom Russell the way that Tim Brown groomed Jerry Porter. Either way, I believe that Walter will be given a chance to compete, but only one chance. This coming training camp will be the most important training camp of AWal's career. And time will tell.

Note: Feel free to comment. I have changed the settings so that others, who are not registered users of Blogger, may comment. And welcome to BlandaRocked.

It's Alive?

2007-02-09T11:23:00.000-08:00

After the 2005 season, after three seasons of being a bottom dweller in the AFC West, Al Davis attempted to reach back to the rise of a Bay Area dynasty. Believing that the brand of football Davis brought with him to Oakland in the 1960s was still viable in today's NFL, in fact still used by some, Davis rehired the last Raider coach to make it work. In the late 1980s, Davis failed in his attempt to modernize the Raider philosophy with the hiring of Mike Shanahan. He replaced him with a Raider legend, a HOF left tackle and offensive line coach.

Art Shell had been a fixture in the Raider organization for the better part of two decades. The quiet man was well known by the players and front office alike. The players understood every nuance of an Art Shell expression. They understood "the look" which forced the instant recollection of every instruction Art Shell had ever given a player, and the look was all that Art Shell needed. He and his players were one. They would always endeavor not to disappoint him, nor he, them. So Al reached backward to that former place, hoping to regain what had been lost in time.

Many of us, riders on the bus of Raider glory in years gone by, cheered with the hope that nostalgia brings. We, along with Al, failed to consider the organizational restructuring required to foundation such a commitment. While we understood that Art Shell had been out of coaching for many years, and expected a certain amount of rust, we failed to understand that "the look" was no longer possible. A quiet man, a man who motivates and teaches with an economy of words and energy, is a difficult man to get to know. When Shell was named coach in the 80s, his players knew every detail of Shell. When he returned in 2005, the strangers who occupied the Raider locker room knew only that Shell was in the Hall as a player and had been a reasonably successful coach in a time before any of them had been old enough to sit up and watch a football game. "The look" meant nothing to them, and Shell, it appears, failed to offer them more.

The Raiders of 2006 were a team with potential, and potential offers more questions than answers. Art Shell is a leader by example, charged with building the potential of a team which had never laid witness to the example. To a degree, Art Shell understood his limitations in communication. He surrounded himself with coaches who knew him, and knew what he wanted. They were, like Shell, former players and coaches from a different time, also unfamiliar to the players and, more importantly, also unfamiliar WITH the players. Ultimately, the team collapsed in a 2-14 orgy of miscommunication.

Somewhere in this confusion, it appears that Al Davis found a moment of clarity. It wasn't the vertical offense which created the most feared team of the 60s, 70s and early 80s. An effective offense isn't the cause of a wide open, gambling style. The style of a team is created by its personality. A team's personality is created by its leader. Al understood, and I now understand, that the Raiders of that earlier era were not born out of the Gilman offense, but from the mind, the tenacity, the arrogance of Al Davis. In order for that earlier team to return, it would require a brash, 30 something, Al Davis to recreate it. A moment of remarkable clarity seems to have shown Al that if he can no longer tinker like Lombardi to reclaim a team lost in time, perhaps he can tinker like Frankenstein and make a monster. The replacement for that team, born in an earlier era, can be born anew from the mind, the tenacity, the arrogance of the 30 something Davis Monster.

Davis had begun his rise on the semi-pro-like coaching staff of USC. There he studied the rising talent of college athletes throughout the country. After leaving USC, he worked and studied under Sid Gilman, innovating the most advanced vertical offense of his day. When he came to the Raiders, he utilized both. He taught the team his offense and, becoming Commissioner of the AFL, signed the best college talent in the country to insure the survival of a league. In Al Davis' moment of clarity, he understood that this would be the blue print for the return of Raider glory.

After firing Art Shell, Davis began looking for the monster's new brain, again reaching back to the past, but in an entirely new way. He searched the breeding grounds where he had been born, looking to find what had been born again. It was only natural that he would begin at USC. He started first with what he knew.

Davis began talking to the young, former Raider quarterbacks coach who had returned to USC to build championship contenders. After speaking to Sarkisian several times, testing his knowledge, his desire, his ambition, one suspects Al eventually put the big question to the young coach. "I came to a team in a similar condition to the Raiders right now. I built a team that appeared in a Super Bowl in every decade but the 90s. I built one of the most feared teams in all of professional sports. I built a team with the best record of every professional sports franchise, not just football. I was not much older than you are now. Can you do the same?" And it is, perhaps, at this point, where Sarkisian balked.

Davis had asked another question that Sarkisian did answer. "Who would you choose as an offensive coordinator?" Sarkisian identified Kiffin, also at USC, who shared a similar background with Sarkisian and Davis. Apparently there was a spark, a recognition, if you will, when Davis and Kiffin met. Their minds, their tenacity, their ambitions embraced. The Davis Monster's brain had been found, and Davis has allowed it to select it's own body, arms and legs, and in April it will acquire its heart.

Come summer, the body parts of this monster will be stitched together. We eagerly await September. Perhaps some stormy autumn night, as lightning strikes the HOT, we will collectively shout, "It's alive! It's alive!"

For the love of the game...

2007-02-05T14:20:00.000-08:00

Back toward the beginning of the 2006 season, many were telling me that Art Shell, Tom Walsh, Al Davis, and Freddie Biletnikoff were dinosaurs, advocates of a game which no longer existed. They were right, of course, but not in the way they meant. The game that I witnessed through the rise to my maturity in the 60s, 70s, and early 80s no longer exists. The difference is not better and stronger athletes (although the technology of performance enhancing drugs has improved), nor new, brilliant, and innovative schemes regarding Xs and Os. Rather, the difference is a capitalist's wet dream - money, and lots of it.

Don't misunderstand. The money has brought good and bad things. But to me it has turned the game into something more akin to Madden Football than a strategic and violent competition between men. The earlier era had far more room for players to innovate and to improvise on the football field. It cared more for the afternoon enjoyment of the fan rather than viewing the fan only as marketing potential. The players were in it for the love of the game, not for their 15 minutes of fame or whatever jewelry they could sport to flaunt their newly found wealth. The game cared more for giving the fans their money's worth, rather than holding them up by the ankles to shake out every loose penny. I remember the 1973 playoff game between the Raiders and the Dolphins, when Stabler came to the sideline during the final, winning, two minute drive - not to talk strategy with John Madden, but to tell him, while looking into the Oakland stands, "The fans are getting their money's worth today, aren't they Coach."

It's a good thing that the players now get their financial due. Al Davis fought for this, and for good reason. The fans go to stadiums to see the players, not the uniforms. They are the conduit for the money that comes to the owners, the league, and to the broadcaster, not a mere beneficiary. The players in prior generations knew that the money made during the short span of their career would not sustain them and their families for very long unless they made wise investments, or were able to parlay the notoriety during their playing days into a novelty position in a business selling insurance or automobiles. Too many of our sports heroes wound up penniless in institutions or out living on the street.

But the current wealth has also brought with it a new kind of player. Star players have become CEOs of their own corporations, independent of any motivation to function according to the requirements of the team. From the Raider fan experience, we have the recent examples of Randy Moss and Jerry Porter. One easily senses that Moss' weekly interview program was designed to push his line of clothing and to further his personal fame rather than any thought of promoting or encouraging his teammates. One questions whether he ever thought about team at all. It appears more likely that he viewed teammates, and opposing players alike, as little more than electronic images in his private game of Madden Football. If the images didn't serve to pump up his self image and marketing ability, he felt free to delete and set up in a new Franchise mode. A 2-14 season? No problem. It never existed. Delete, start Franchise, begin again. The Players of the 60s and 70s were faced with spending their careers in a single franchise. A losing season meant redoubling your efforts or going through the heartache all over again.

Working out with the team to get in football shape? It's not a priority for Jerry Porter. Workout privately with a personal trainer to get those pretty ripped abs. So much the better background for a large gold dollar sign suspended from a thick gold rope.

It's interesting to me that Al Davis always had the great reputation of being able to work with difficult players. It is not the above mentioned types where Al had his success. The "difficult" players in the earlier years were not egotistical loners. In those more conservative years, players, like Ted Hendricks, were free spirits who hated to wear neckties. They liked a good joke and didn't want to take life too seriously. Football is, after all, a game, and games are meant to be fun. To them, there was nothing more fun than closely matched competition. In those days, rebellion was wearing white shoes. While other organizations treated football like the military preparing for war, the Raiders loved individuality so long as all that mattered on Sunday afternoon was the team and the victory. The personality of a Raider team was the melting pot of individualism directed at a single goal. The Raiders were, in short, the real "America's team."

In the current climate, coaches no longer set their Xs and Os to represent real players. They are part of the computer program. Many modern coaches question whether they should allow their quarterback to audible at the line. In earlier days, quarterbacks frequently called most of their own plays. They knew the value of team because it opened lines of communications between players who would report to the field general whether they were beating their opponent or getting beat. I remember George Blanda, the man who inspired the name of this website, making adjustments by talking to his teammates in the huddle, and drawing new receiver routs and blocking schemes in the blades of grass, like kids will do in pick up games in the neighborhood.

John Madden gave an interview last year, at about the time he was inducted in the hall, and not long after Art Shell was named the Raiders new head coach. He said that he never wanted to sound like he was stuck in the mud, so during his broadcasting career he always questioned whether players of his era could compete in the modern era. Now he views it differently and, he says, more realistically. He asks, instead, "could any of the modern players have survived in the earlier era?"

But for a few, I think not. Old school would defeat the modern era with intelligence, desire, and the flexibility to adjust on the run. Many argue that Art Shell proved that he and Davis were out of touch with today's game. On the contrary, Art Shell proved that the modern player is out of touch with the love of the game.

So here we are...

2006-12-27T09:45:00.000-08:00

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.

Piling On.

2006-12-01T16:22:00.000-08:00

I've learned, over the years, that whenever you have a vast multitude of media voices all saying the same thing it is either because (1) it is recognized that the large majority of the population are buying what the media is selling, (2) multiple reporters are being fed "inside" information that they believe will catapult them into prognosticator stardom, or (3) a combination of the two, one feeding off the other. With the issue of Tom Walsh, it now appears that we started with 2 which morphed into 3.

The sniping at both Art Shell and Tom Walsh began virtually before Shell ever began orchestrating his interviews with his players. We were quickly warned of the Raider disaster from 1994, which wasn't so much of a disaster, merely a disappointment with 9 wins and 7 losses. The Raiders missed the playoffs by their failure to turn one defeat into one more victory. They had made the playoffs the year before, losing to the eventual AFC champion Buffalo Bills. We were told that the reason for that disaster was that Walsh, who inherited a talented, playoff caliber team, ran an archaic offense that provided no opportunity for adjustments, nor took advantage of the skills the players on the roster presented. We were told that Tim Brown and Jeff Hostetler had no faith in Walsh, and would repeatedly change Walsh's plays in the huddle. Walsh was made the butt of jokes for having run a bed & breakfast in Idaho, with no mention of the fact that part of the function of that bed & breakfast was to serve as a recovery center for children suffering from Cancer. We were also told that Shell was Al Davis' puppet, and he was the only one who would any longer accept a Head Coaching position from Al Davis because of Al's insistence on controlling absolutely everything within the organization.

I have even seen it suggested that Al Davis, Art Shell, and Tom Walsh don't care whether the Raiders are losing because they are only in it for the money and/or recognition. Such shear stupidity is not only an insult from the truly ignorant as it relates to these three men, but an insult to everyone who knows their history.

So this is where we began the season. The Jerry Porter situation added to the distractions. Every coach who Porter worked for had experienced attitude problems from the WR. Shell drew a line and Porter immediately crossed it. Initially Shell received support for that line, but sniping in the media soon began to tell us that Shell needed Porter more than Porter needed Shell. Reporters began to compare Porter's transgression against the half effort provided by Moss, and wondered aloud why Moss wasn't being benched like Porter. In the alternative, we were asked why Shell simply couldn't overcome his disagreements with Porter and put him back on the field. The difference between Porter and Moss is rather obvious for anyone willing to examine the issue. What Porter told Shell was that Porter resented that Mike Martz wasn't hired instead, that Porter didn't like Art Shell, that he would not work out with the team in the off season, nor even be in Oakland. Porter showed up at training camp wearing a t-shirt sporting a raised middle finger (keeping it on throughout camp), then developed a mysterious injury, keeping him out of practice and the preseason for the majority of camp. When Porter finally returned to practices he vocally complained about them in the locker room and on the practice field. After returning from a suspension for insubordination and being inserted in several plays, Porter again developed a mysterious injury and has been out of practices again.

Moss, on the other hand, has reported himself to be "unhappy," and that is why he is only giving us half an effort. But unlike Porter, Moss shows for every practice, runs his routs and will still make catches if he doesn't have to work for them too hard. His unhappiness with the team is expressed in the national media, every Monday, but not in the locker room nor on the practice field. Further, Moss has been a force in the game long enough that he still draws coverage. On any given pass play, Moss is drawing three defenders covering his half effort. This, at least, leaves Shell's other receivers in single coverage. Shell isn't "happy" with Moss, and Moss will manage to get himself traded in the off season. But Moss still represents some value for the money. Porter has made himself just so much expensive garbage.

For my part I remember I had complaints about the Raiders in the 1994 season, but I didn't expect that Shell would be fired. My complaints were that the Raiders simply had no running game to speak of, due largely to a very mediocre offensive line. There were a few big names, but the line was inflicted with injuries during the season, and a couple of OL members had careers which lasted less than four years, highly touted coming out of college, but a bust in the NFL. The other part of the Raiders running game was that they had no runner. Harvey Williams, their primary ball carrier, never had a 1000 yard season in his career. The 1994 Raiders had a relatively weak WR corps, and a QB with almost no accuracy on the deep ball. Defenses were free to limit their coverages to protecting against middle range passes, involving their LBs and their safeties. It was vital that the Raiders be able to run in order to be able to pass. Walsh sent Williams into the line again and again with little or no effect.

What was little reported at the time was the dissention in the coaching ranks. I've never been clear about where that dissention came from, but Mike White and others were reportedly going to Al Davis and arguing that the Raiders would never reach another Super Bowl as long as Art Shell was the head coach. White claimed that Shell's offense was archaic, and Shell, himself, a dinosaur. The dissenters managed to get Art and Walsh fired, and White drew the plumb HC job which had been Shell's. Instituting the vaunted West Coast offense, White took Shell's same team to an 8-8 record his first year, and to a 7-9 record his second. After two seasons White was gone, and so was the West Coast offense. The Raiders attempted to return to the vertical offense under Bugel as the players had convinced Davis that they responded well to Joe. The Raiders brought in Jeff George who was a great physical talent but a poor leader. They drafted Napoleon Kauffman who was a lightning quick runner, but so physically light that he could be tackled by a stiff breeze. The Raiders Defensive Coordinator, Fox, quit in the middle of training camp. The Raiders started falling apart before the season even started, and after the first loss to Kansas City, Bugel refused to show up for the post game press conference. The season was ended before it began, and the Raiders went 4-12. Davis went back to the man he had first selected the year before, when the players intervened in favor of Joe Bugel.

Jon Gruden came in and restored order in the locker room. He recognized immediately that the Raiders lacked success because of the personnel. He spent two years rebuilding the team, going 8-8 in each of those years. In his second year he convinced Al Davis to hire his friend from Philly, Mike Lombardi, to help with personnel. Gruden had complained that he had to sell Al Davis on whoever Gruden wanted to bring in or draft. Gruden never said, as many in the press reported, that Al made all of the draft decisions. He merely complained that he didn't want to have to explain himself every time he said he required a player. He felt that Al should just trust him because he was the head coach. I've never had a problem with Al's position on this. Nobody is going to get their mitts on my money unless they can explain to me what I'm buying. There is little doubt in my mind that Gruden had Lombardi join the Raiders so that Lombardi could do the explaining.

After two years of winning football, Jon Gruden left for Tampa Bay. While the press expressed that the reason for the departure was Jon's inability to work with Davis, this was never even alluded to by either Gruden or Davis. Gruden told Davis that his entire family was from and lived in Tampa Bay, and that one almost never gets the opportunity to be an NFL Head Coach in their own home town, and able to even hire members of their own family on the staff. Davis agreed to let him go. For a price. Enter Bill Callahan.

There were rumors after Gruden's first season in Tampa that Gruden was about to bring his friend, Mike Lombardi, to Tampa to take over GM duties. Many in the press already had Lombardi's bags packed. Suddenly, it wasn't Lombardi that was joining Gruden in Tampa, it was the Raiders' defacto GM, Bruce Allen.

Callahan kept Gruden's offensive schemes, never changing them right through the Super Bowl they played against Jon Gruden's Bucs. Jon Gruden proved in that Super Bowl that he knew how to dismantle an offense that he created. It was also apparent, as that first year under Callahan progressed, that Callahan was one of those all too common managers who believe that you keep those under you off balance and uncomfortable by playing head games with them. This is not a good idea where your employees are paid to play a game. Games are supposed to be fun. Otherwise you don't want to play them. By the end of his second season, a 4-12 debacle, Callahan's players virtually mutinied.

And it is this point in Raider history where I believe many of our current struggles began, the season before Turner came on board as Head Coach. The players learned that they could change a Head Coach they didn't like by refusing to play hard for him. It's not that the players sat down to plan such a thing. It's just that there was no joy in practice, it was just very unpleasant. Players showed up to go through the motions of their jobs just to get through it, so they could leave at the end of the day. This is a mindset that can take hold very quickly, and can be extraordinarily difficult to remove. This is the atmosphere that Jerry Porter came of age in. I believe that Jerry Porter simply thinks that this is the way things work in the NFL, and he has no clue that he has done anything wrong. But the long and the short of it is that I don't think that Turner was a bad coach. I just don't think that he recognized the atmosphere in the Raider locker room, and never changed it. As Art Shell noted, "the inmates were running the asylum," and they had been for three years.

Al Davis has stated over the last several years that the biggest mistake he ever made was listening to the backstabbers who managed the ouster of Shell in the first place. In the off season he called on his old friend to return. At the age of 77 it is known that Davis isn't as vital as he once was. His health appears to be failing, and he won't be in this business too much longer. As a man who has devoted his entire reputation to the Raiders over the last forty plus years, the Raiders that he leaves behind will be his one and only legacy. He would like that legacy to resemble what he actually built. Art Shell has been through all of it, the good and the bad. There is no man more capable of restoring Raider traditions both on and off the field. While Davis' financial interest will be inherited by his son, there is little doubt that Shell is slated to play a big part in the Raider organization once Al departs either through retirement or "feet first."

However, Shell has been absent from the organization for the last 11 years. Over that span of time others have moved in close proximity to Al Davis, and those folks hope for their share of the team (either in money or power) after the old man calls it quits. To at least one of them, Art Shell must seem like the bastard child who showed up at the reading of the will to steal a share of the riches. Shell now reveals that such a person has been fomenting the media "pile on" from inside the organization, backstabbing Davis, Walsh, and Shell.

Many have criticized Shell for taking this matter public. If it were simply Shell's idea to get rid of the person causing the problem, I think that Shell would have kept it "in house." That is, and has always been Shell's policy. When Mike Shannahan tried to get Shell fired behind his back, Shell never took that to the public. When Mike White stabbed Shell in the back, Shell remained mum to the press. These things eventually became public because they were revealed by Al Davis. Shell says he knows who the person is, and he will confront that person directly if it continues. By bringing this matter public, Shell is telling the press and the fans that just because you're getting information from "inside" the organization, it doesn't mean that the information is factually based or lacking in "agenda." Some reporters have attempted to identify the source by the process of elimination. Some reporters refuse to speculate and are intent on digging further. Some reporters are attacking Shell for going public in this with continued diatribes on the incompetence of Shell, Walsh, and the rest of the organization. Hmmmm.

Many years ago I stopped listening to various sports reporters I no longer trusted. Some are negative just to be negative. Others imagine they are on some great vendeta like Glenn Dickey who writes the same anti-Al Davis article at the beginning of every season. I've taken my information from making sense of what the players, coaches, and staff say. We all remember how much time the press spent in the off season telling us that no coach wanted to work for Al Davis because of his blasted interference. How awful that an owner should have a say in what he owns. But I found an interesting tidbit regarding some things said by Tim Brown. Brown is often offered up as a big critic of the Raiders, but Brown is a critic of a lot of things. Of particular note is this:

"'Al is going to have his input here and there. That's part of it. But when Jon Gruden came in he was able to change things, and you knew when he spoke, he was speaking from himself and not from Al Davis. I don't think any other Raiders coach has done that except Art.'"

And this:

"Likely still stinging from his exit from the Raiders during 2005 training camp, he's [Brown] not a big fan of personnel executive Mike Lombardi. At one point, Brown detoured into a scathing, unsolicited critique about how Lombardi, and not Davis, is the reason people don't want to play or coach for the Raiders."

That last is particularly interesting in view of the events on Wednesday afternoon. To read the rest of the article, click here.

If you are a relatively recent Raider fan, you likely have no interest in much of this and would simply like to see the team winning again with any offensive system. But for many of us who have been around since the 60s, it is the Raider personality that drew us in, and a take no prisoners swagger that keeps us here. When it becomes apparent that I'm rooting for a uniform and not for a team with which I feel a strong connection, I may well start to lose interest after nearly forty years. There is no one in the NFL who I would like to see succeed more than Art Shell. There is no team I want back in the Super Bowl more than the Oakland Raiders.

Walsh out, Shoop in.

2006-11-28T15:46:00.000-08:00

Folks understand that I don't hold Walsh as responsible for the Raiders' offensive production (or lack thereof) beyond the efforts of the players. And, as Shell has stated in the past that he doesn't believe in firing people midseason, I doubt that this was entirely Shell's decision. My feeling is that Walsh was generating so much criticism that he was becoming a distraction, and inadvertently providing non-energized players with an excuse for the lack of player performance. Shell had no choice but to take the focus off of Walsh and place it back where it belongs. However Shell makes that decision with some danger. If the Raiders fail to improve on their record over the final five games of the season, the cross-hairs might well take new aim in Shell's direction.

Having spent much time defending Walsh, I'd now like to offer this criticism. Of note to me is the camaraderie on the defensive side of the ball. The defense plays as a cohesive unit, guided by Rob Ryan who the players respect as a leader and a colleague. It has always seemed to me that Walsh has played it somewhat aloof, distancing himself from his players and spending game time high up in the press boxes. Ryan, on the other hand, has been on the sideline, encouraging and congratulating his players as they go on and off the field. This isn't helped by the fact that Walsh has been out of the NFL for 11 years, so most players know nothing of him but what they can find in the NFL archives.

Shoop has been an OC before for the Chicago Bears. While he did help direct a 13-3 season, he was well criticized for being overly conservative (a complaint leveled at Tom Walsh in 1994), and was run out of town by the fans (much as Tom Walsh was here). Walsh, however, is not fleeing town. He's staying on the staff, accepting a demotion. May I say I respect Tom's style, and I think his input regarding the Gilman offense will be invaluable.

I have a couple of pieces of advice for John Shoop. First, don't hesitate to pick Tom's brain. Whether or not Walsh was an effective OC, his experience in the Gilman style offense is vast, having worked many a year in that system. From what I'm led to believe, Walsh is also a constant student of the tendencies of the Defensive Coordinators throughout the league. Second, take a page from Rob Ryan's book. Talk to Art Shell and see if he has a problem with your presence on the sidelines instead of the press box. Show investment in the progress of the players. If you want to become the leader that Tom Walsh could not become, experiencing success and failure in real time with your boys will take you far. This is true at all levels of management in every occupation. If the players feel that your success is their success and their failures are your failures, they will never let you down.

I wish you, John Shoop, success and good luck.

Let's talk some Raider football…

2006-11-21T14:28:00.002-08:00

When he was hired in the off season, Art Shell said that he understood that his responsibility was to return to Raider tradition on the playing field. I've been watching Raider football since the late 1960s and I understand the Raiders game day traditions to be these:

1. Run a North/South offense that constantly threatens to attack with the deep ball.

2. Setting up that long ball requires smash-mouth, straight at you running, requiring the defense to adjust by bringing up the LBs and safeties to stop the run. The Raiders expect that opponents will attempt to stop the running game first. The Raiders don't care. They will continue to run into the line to wear down the defense by the end of the game. When the D is tired, that's when we'll strike deep.

3. "We don't take what you give us, we take what we want." This Raider mantra is largely misinterpreted. It doesn't mean that if you attempt to stop us from running, we'll run anyway. It means that to "just win, Baby," we will make you pay a price for doing that. You may hold our HB to only a few yards, but it will wear you down until you're defenseless or make you vulnerable to the long strike. We will do whatever it takes to win.

4. We will keep the game close, allowing our opponents to use up their emotion early. We might play a little "rope-a-dope" on the part of our offense while our defense punishes your RBs, WRs, and your QB.

5. We will always be prepared to win it on the last drive of the game!

I'd been trying to think of when, exactly, was the last time I've seen this tradition implemented by the Raiders. And then it finally occurred to me. I saw it just last Sunday between the Raiders and the Chiefs. It is true that Brooks made a difference with this offense. Many have said that Brooks is the only thing that worked, and his magic gave the Raiders a chance to win. I disagree.

Brooks is no different, as a QB the week before he was injured, when many fans were calling for Walter to replace him. The only difference in Brooks, between then and now, is that the OL is playing a little better and Brooks has had plenty of time to learn this offense from the book and light practices. Brooks didn't do anything exceptional. He only did the things that this offense requires a veteran, starting QB to do.

There is a hidden message contained in the Raiders assertion that they will do whatever it takes to win. When they say that, think of the "Holy Roller," think of the "Sea of Hands." It means that Raider football has improvisation built into it. The Raiders expect the QB to call audibles liberally. The Raiders expect a QB to buy time with his feet by rolling to the corner when rushed up the middle or by stepping up and finding a lane when being attacked from the sides. The Raiders don't want their QB to just stand tall in the pocket. The Raiders want their QB to do whatever it takes. Particularly, the Raiders want the QB to move around, keeping blockers between himself and the pass rushers. While the QB is moving around, the Raiders expect the WRs to break off their routs, if necessary, and move into holes vacated by blitzing DBs or LBs. If a ball is thrown low, the Raiders expect the WR to run toward the ball, thereby reducing the possibility of an interception. If the WR has completed his rout, and the QB still has the ball, the WR is expected to come back to the QB - placing the WR between the DB and the QB - giving the QB a target coming toward him instead of running away. The Raiders expect that the WRs will talk to the QB in the huddle to let him know which routs are working, and which DBs are beatable. The Raiders expect that the QB will adjust routs within a given play simply by telling the WRs in the huddle. (i.e., "Instead of cutting toward the middle, cut toward the sideline.")

These are also typical adjustments made during halftime, but the Raiders have often had the tradition of making the more minor adjustments on the fly. Halftime adjustments don't mean bringing in a different playbook, they mean adjusting the plays you brought. For instance, the coaches might have noticed that whenever the #1 WR cuts from the sideline toward the middle, the FS comes up to meet him from the other side of the field, and as an adjustment they'll inform the WR to go below the FS instead of over the top. This is an adjustment that a WR should remember to make. And this is the adjustment I believe was given to Randy Moss at halftime on Sunday. This is the adjustment that Brooks expected Moss to make when the FS came across to intercept the last Raider pass of the day.

On Sunday the Raiders played smash mouth football and kept the game close throughout. They gave up the lead, but they had the ball on the last drive of the day with all three timeouts. Brooks, adjusting to what he'd learned during the game, moved the team smartly and quickly down the field the KC 8 yard line with time to run four plays to get into the end zone. Brooks fired at Moss, expecting him to drop in front of the FS. The rest is what it is. Take away the earlier part of this season, and take away the player attitudes that have showed up in force this season, take away the negativity from the mainstream media, take away players who are more concerned with the success of their fashion line than winning the game in front of them, and you'd have a traditional Raider victory.

Would I call this team a disaster. Not hardly. To call them that is to look at the W/L record and to disregard all other information available. What I see is a team with a myriad of locker room problems and short on players at a few positions. But I also see a team on the potential cusp of greatness. Without the problems I've just identified, this team would be at least 5-4 and in the playoff hunt. Enthusiastic participation by Moss and Porter could have had this team at 6-3, or maybe even 7-2. On its current course, if Shell stays determined, I see this team in the playoffs next year. Don't think so? Well, I'll wait with you. We'll see.

The talented loser…

2006-11-19T15:56:00.000-08:00

Do you want to know why Jerry Rice is a far greater WR than Randy Moss? Take a look at the Raiders’ 2006 season. I will acknowledge that Randy Moss is the more gifted of the two. Throw the ball up and Randy has the skill to get underneath it, fight for it, escape with it, and score with it. But will he? Sure – if he feels like it. If you keep Randy “happy” and constantly tell him that he’s the best there ever was, he’ll show up several times a game. I’ve leaned from Randy that his attitude is, “Keep making me look good so that my line of clothing and my other ventures do well, and I’ll help you win some games.”

There was never a “Jerry ratio.” Jerry Rice earned his respect on the field by learning how to get open, focusing on the catch, and moving the ball toward the goal line. Jerry’s talent wasn’t always God-given, very often he just worked hard to achieve it. I learned from Jerry that his attitude was, “I’ll do whatever it takes to give my team a chance to win.” Jerry didn’t complain because his team wasn’t making him look good. Jerry complained only when he was open but the ball went to others who weren’t. Jerry understood that as long as he was on the field, giving his best, that the ball would come to him because he was the QB’s best choice.

At the start of this season, my biggest fear was Randy Moss. That sounds odd when you say it, considering that Randy plays for my team. What I viewed as absolutely the worst case scenario has come to pass. Back then I worried that if the team did not start well because of the weakness of the offensive line (causing QBs to dump the ball early, and making the deep pass difficult), Randy would begin to pout and brood that he wasn’t getting the ball enough and the team wasn’t making him look good enough. I worried that the lack of leadership on this offensive unit would come home to roost, unable to battle the fact that the teams’ most talented player refused to show up. You think I’m wrong? Randy says I’m right. It comes right from the horse’s mouth.

Sunday afternoon, without the help of Randy Moss, the Raiders were on the cusp of winning a major victory (not for the season, but for the organization). The Raiders were seven yards from scoring the winning touchdown after leading most of the day. The heavy lifting by WRs on Sunday came from Curry and Whitted. But on what turned out to be the Raiders last offensive play of the day, Brooks looked to “the man” for the win. Running the ball was fairly out of the question because the Raiders had no time-outs and only a few seconds. Brooks made his one bad call of the day and fired the pass to Randy Moss strolling in the back of the end zone. A defender stepped in front, in full view of Randy, and intercepted while Randy watched with limited interest. One could almost hear Randy mutter under his breath, “If I’m not getting my touches all game long, don’t be lookin’ for me at the end of the game.”

And this, I maintain, is what’s been wrong with the Raiders this year. Based on what I’ve seen, I don’t believe this team was destined for the playoffs, but I do believe that they would have done better than last year had they not had the attitude problems on offense. The defense started this year on shaky ground. But they have come together as a unit with the on-field leadership of Sapp and the side-line energy of Rob Ryan. The offense has been burdened by Jerry Porter and Randy Moss, the two players most counted upon in the off season to provide life and spark. The Raider organization did these two players the honor of saying openly and publicly that the organization’s success this year would depend on these two talents. The organization has been rewarded for that public identification with blackmail and indifference. I hereby dedicate this Raiders’ season to the league’s two most talented losers.

Just a quick one:

2006-11-14T09:10:00.000-08:00

We're hung up on Tom Walsh because the media tells us to be. "Walsh has been out of the NFL for years, and he's been mayor of a small town and the general manager of a bed-and-breakfast. Obviously the man's a loser. He's… [wait for it]… PREDICTABLE." The reason I've argued against that meme from the beginning is the danger it represents to accountability. Now, ineffective QB Andrew Walter has latched on to it as his new EXCUSE. Walter needs to understand that nobody expected anything from him but a struggling rookie. When Walter has started more than seven games, and has learned how to fake a hand off, and has developed a sense for pressure, and can take a snap during the climax of a game without fumbling, he can criticize coaches who have forgotten far more football than he will ever learn. As far as I'm concerned, that goes for the national and local media as well.

According to the Broncos, there was nothing "predictable" about the Raiders' offense on Sunday. The Raiders' offense kept them off balance all afternoon, and the Broncos were glad to win it. Imagine how much more effective the Raiders would have been if Moss hadn't decided to go "pouty" on Sunday.

When Shell came back to the Raiders he said one thing that was definitely right. The lunatics had taken over the assylum. We have one WR who told Shell during their first meeting, "I don't want you to be the coach, I want Mike Martz, so trade me." We have another WR who tells us he's just not happy enough, and until he's happy he'll continue to have alligator arms and make half assed attempts. We have tackles who look more like swinging doors. These same players were on Turner's team, which only managed 9 wins in two seasons. But now that they have returned for 2006, these players are a product of Walsh's "predictable" play calling. As far as I can tell, there is nothing wrong with Walsh's play calling that sound execution couldn't fix. Just, as it turned out, there was nothing wrong with Ryan's play calling that sound execution couldn't fix. I suggest that we now give Shell and Walsh the same chance to fix the problems on the other side of the ball.

It's time to let Brooks back in there to see what he can do.

Slow improvement...

2006-11-13T09:21:00.000-08:00

First, let me say that I haven’t joined the “the problem is Tom Walsh” crowd. I’ve never felt that, and I still don’t. The reason has always been that I’ve never seen an offensive scheme carried out with the exception of the first quarter against Arizona. And then it worked fine. I saw a hint of it in the second game against Denver.

I don’t feel I can second guess Walsh regarding whatever play he calls in a particular circumstance. Any situation has a dozen possibilities, and Walsh has more information from the sideline than I do (bimbo sideline reporters not withstanding).

Many argue that Walsh should call more screens and short passes to slow down the rush. Screens and short passes were not designed to substitute for a weak OL. I see these plays called in almost every game, but a screen doesn’t look much different than a deep pass if the QB still gets sacked. Some screens and short passes take longer to develop than a deep pass so the line is still required to maintain blocks. Quick hitting plays weren’t designed to sustain a drive. They were designed to catch the defense off guard. If you make them a regular staple, you don’t catch the defense off guard and you are continually stuffed at the line of scrimmage. It is crucial, in this offense, that the OL pick up their assignments and maintain their blocks to the whistle. The Raiders have not had a player do that well since “the Wiz.” Added to that is the fact that each player is playing a new position, using a different technique, and I think that might just be a bigger problem than questionable play calling.

Andrew Walter is a man with too much weight on his shoulders, and I’d like to see Shell give Brooks another shot. Under the category of things that are suddenly crystal clear, saying that AWal is just like a rookie because he didn’t play his rookie season understates the issue. Walter didn’t play in his college post season because he was injured. He was injured early in 2005. So not only didn’t he play, he didn’t practice. AWal is a rookie who hasn’t practiced for a year before this season. Now he feels he’s being told, “Lead the Oakland Raiders to victory against their most storied rivals.” When looking at it in that light you begin to understand the fumbled snaps and the sacks.

There is no refinement in Walter’s game. His fakes are almost unnoticeable, he makes poor decisions, and he has, again, developed happy feet. What Walter should be doing (and I’m sure he’s being so coached) is to only use as much time as he has. If he only has time for his first read, he should make the throw or throw it away. Instead, Walter will stand there and wait for receivers to come open, knowing that there is no pocket, because he thinks the onus is on him to pick up positive yardage on every play. He’s stood up admirably, but one wonders if he is nearing the breaking point.

There are those who argue that Walsh and Shell should be working in plays from other offensive systems which these players are more familiar or capable of running. I’d agree if what we were trying to do was to find an offense to fit these players - as Bill Walsh did with the 49ers. But we are attempting the opposite. We have a system, and we are invested in finding players to fit it. This has been described to me has attempting to fit a square peg into a round hole. On the contrary. The round hole is now the Gilman system, and we are looking for round players.

A missing ingredient on offense (until this week) has been that of a leader. The defense has benefited by the guiding personality of Sapp, with all of the players on that unit submitting themselves to his game day leadership. Moss is not a leader, and no other player on offense has been established enough to make a difference. How that is beginning to change I will explain below.

The argument regarding Walsh seems misplaced. Where the argument squarely sits is whether the Raiders are doing the right thing by emphasizing the Gilman without the players capable of running it. To me that is the one and only controversy, and I currently am on board with what the Raiders are attempting. I think we will succeed, but I think it will take a significant amount of time.

But there are some good things happening here. Against Denver, the Raiders' OL played significantly better, even without Sims, Gallery and, for a time, Grove. Why would the line play better with three injuries? I have two theories.

The first is that it has been reported since training camp that the defense, well ahead of the offense, virtually stymies the offense in practice. This is like a 98 pound athlete trying to learn to wrestle against a 300 pounder. The second team OL takes on competition that allows them to see how plays are supposed to look when they are carried out correctly. Each unit on this team improves once they witness what success looks like.
With the surviving players on the line playing with extra attention to detail in order to accommodate the second teamers during the game, and the second teamers with a visual understanding of their goal, the line plays more solid, but still out of sync.

Second is that there is leadership emerging from the RB position. In recent weeks, because of injuries, Art Shell has been going with a committee at that position. That means stepping up the playing time for Crockett, the natural leader on the Raiders' offense. The small unit of RBs is starting to mirror the attitude of the successful defensive unit. Part of the reason that Walter had more time on Sunday afternoon was because the RBs are picking up their blocks! Hopefully Shell will recognize and nurture this seedling, and help it grow throughout the offensive unit.

In the long run, it looks like there are still significant attitude problems on the offensive unit, and I estimate that 3 to 5 players will need to be replaced through free agency and the draft. The Raiders should spend their off season retaining all of their starters on the defensive side of the ball, and seeking improvements on the OL, at TE, and possibly at QB. These pickups should be made looking for maturity and leadership.

Ultimately, however, the final Denver game of the season was decided by an inability to finish the game. Finishing the game is usually the last accomplishment in the development of an NFL unit. Once the skills are learned, players begin to play the whole game. We won't see this unit finish games until the OL has solidified its skills.

I think this team will finish better than it finished the previous two years. The last two years finished on a downward spiral. This season will finish on the rise, but the team won't start winning in streaks until next season.

Note: Are the booth officials now looking at replays that the TV audience doesn't see? On two occasions, the booth officials made calls on instant replay that were contrary to what I saw on TV.

I thought there would be a game on ESPN...

2006-11-06T20:22:00.000-08:00

I don't know that I will be able to post on Tuesday, so I'm writing in the 4th quarter during the game. I likely will add some thoughts during the week.

Is there nobody who can broadcast a football game on Monday night? I tuned in expecting to see the Raiders play the Seahawks. But there wasn't anything on but an interview and highlight show with some idiot named Tony Kornheiser.

The OL still is... well, not very good. But I've lost my faith in Andrew Walter. Tonight he showed a combination of skills ranging from Drew Bledsoe to Mark Wilson. He has no mobility and negates his quick release because he holds the ball too long. In order to avoid incompletions, he takes sacks. He has absolutely no sense of where the pocket is. Granted, with this OL whatever pocket exists is ragged, but the QB needs to find it none the less. Walter steps up, but he doesn't step up into anything and keeps moving without looking for someplace to unload the ball. He is not helping this OL. For some reason he decided this was his night to pass when the running game would have set the stage. I'd like to see Brooks get another shot.

This is not a Walsh problem. This is a bad QB problem. Walsh pulled out everything tonight - shotgun formations, screens, short passes, screens - Walter had all of it to use but used none of it effectively.

Moss is still dropping passes. I don't think it's lack of effort, he's just dropping passes.

One criticsm for Rob Ryan. Caveman, when you're confronted with a young running QB you need to employ a spy. The QB is going to run whenever he's unsure. You have to cut that lane off, discourage him from doing so and force him to throw or be sacked.

There will be no turn around this season. The best option for Shell is to keep on keeping on, and then find what tools become available in the off season. He will certainly have a good idea what he needs and the test for Shell will be whether or not he finds it. I think reintroducing Brooks would be a good idea. It might give us a chance to see if this offense can be more effective, and it might light a fire under Walter. If he is "the real deal" he'll respond to the pressure.

And one more thing... I've found that there are play action passes in this offense. It's just that, apparently, neither Walter nor Jordan know how to fake a hand off. So there are play action passes, they are just difficult to pick out. One of the crucial elements of the Gilman is that you have to sell the play action, and this is a skill that players learn early and often. Between Walter and Jordan - they couldn't sell a bottle of water to a man dying of thirst.

What will it be?

2006-11-03T15:39:00.000-08:00

"'When I looked at it on film, it was like, Wow ... that was a pretty nice play,' [Kirk] Morrison said. 'But it happened so fast. In the game it seemed like the ball was in the air forever. It was like it all happened in slow motion.'"

And this is why the defense is playing so well. This is the third year Rob Ryan has been building this defense, and it appears that the players have finally gotten it. Several have reported that when they are on the field, the game slows down for them. This is the dynamic conflagration of knowledge and athleticism.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the ball, the players have been introduced to their third offense in four years. Every member of the offensive line has been asked to change position. Some, like Gallery and Grove, have changed position three times. At the same time, the Raiders have also had numerous changes at Quarterback. We started in 2003 with Gannon, but finished with Mirer. We started 2004 with Gannon, and finished with Collins. We started 2005 with Collins and, unfortunately finished with Collins. We started 2006 with Brooks, and we're currently working on Walter (who never took an NFL snap before this season started).

Shell and Walsh (and the assistant coaches) are attempting to teach a style of blocking that has been largely discarded in the NFL in recent years. The style of blocking the Raiders are instilling is a straight up, confrontational style, as opposed to a misdirect/redirect method preferred by the West Coast offense. It seeks to blow a hole open for a running back rather than to trick the Defensive Lineman/Linebacker into vacating the hole. It seeks to create a wall around the Quarterback on passing plays until the whistle is blown, as opposed to keeping the Defensive Lineman/Linebacker off balance and directing him away from the Quarterback. The footwork between the two is vastly different. The difference between the two styles is on a par with the difference in style between Mohammad Ali (West Coast) and George Foreman (Gilman). But don't kid yourself into thinking that one is finesse and the other is brute strength. Both require solid foundational skills. They just use leverage for different ends. Perhaps the reason no teams commit fully to the Gilman now is because they anticipate the problems that Shell is going through, attempting to retrain linemen used to a not-so-different technique, but different enough.

One can expect that virtually every member of the Raiders' Offensive Line has practiced the modern style, if not his whole football career, the last many years. They can understand it intellectually, but in the heat of battle memory motors cause them to react as they have in past games. This is accentuated when defensive linemen and linebackers attack against the modern technique.

Most of the change is required to be performed by the tackles. This is why the center of the Raider line finally seems to be solidifying, while the tackles are still giving up sacks. The West Coast doesn't worry as much about the tackles. If the WC tackles can just push their assignments to the outside, the Quarterback gets the ball off so fast he won't have to worry about the Defensive Ends. In the Gilman, where the Quarterback must hang onto the ball a little longer, the tackles have to worry about the DEs, the OLBs, and the CBs. The tackles must learn to "pass off" assignments to an inside lineman, TE, or an RB, and move to another man. The inside linemen, the TEs, and the RBs must also learn to receive assignments passed off to them. This is very likely why Shell and Walsh are attempting to keep the offense as simple as possible ("vanilla" in the vernacular of some).

We haven't noticed so much that Ryan has been running a "vanilla" defense while linemen have been learning to play like linebackers, and linebackers have been learning to play like defensive backs. Ryan said just recently that he's now getting comfortable enough with the way the players are responding that he can begin to add some complexity, which will make the defense even more dynamic.

We are impatient with the offense, and rightfully so. We've waited three years for this team to win more than five games in a season. But learning something this different will take time. Perhaps more time than this season can provide. However, as the defense is playing so well, the Raiders understand that they can win more than they lose if they can just put up 17 points per game. This is both the goal and the dilemma for the Raiders. If they want to continue to rebuild the Gilman as the foundational Raider offense, they must continue what they've started. If they mix in a little West Coast with their Gilman in order to squeeze out an extra TD or two in the short run, how will it damage what they are trying to do in the long run. The fastest way to teach someone Spanish is to only allow them to speak Spanish, and the same is true with football fundamentals.

My hope is that there are so many years of football knowledge on this coaching staff that the coaches will put their heads together and come up with a creative solution that will satisfy both needs before the season is lost. What is needed here is a uniquely Raider solution. Undoubtedly, three years from now (the same amount of time taken by the defense) the game will slow down for this offense. But will Raider fans wait three years? I'm sure that Shell does not expect them to, so I expect to see the beginnings of a solution when the Raiders play the Seahawks. What will it be?

A little perspective on Art Shell…

2006-10-30T12:51:00.000-08:00

Art Shell has taken over a team that has only won 13 times in three seasons. He was placed in charge - and I do mean in complete charge - of a dysfunctional team that couldn't come to terms with two different head coaches. He's taken over an offense with Quarterback, Tight End and Offensive Line issues, as well as difficult Wide Receiver attitudes. He inherited a team without an established Quarterback. From all informational reports, apart from the Raider hater portion of the media, Art Shell has been given complete control of the Raiders' team, while Al Davis attends to his health and other issues.

There are times when Art Shell must have felt like the loneliest man on Earth. He warned us, when he arrived for his second stint as head coach, that the offensive line wasn't suited for a vertical offense, and it would have to be restructured and retrained. He said that that work wouldn't be completed until near mid season. At this point in the season, the progress is certain but slow, but it is always difficult to even take an OL player from his position and to give him another. To do it with the entire OL at once multiplies the difficulty by five.

The local and national press warned us when Shell came in that he was an Al Davis retread, and that the Raiders would do no better than they did in 1994 (his last season in his previous stint). They maintained that stance until the Raiders won their first four preseason games, and then switched their stance to "the Raiders must be play off bound." Through those first four preseason wins the offense never looked completely comfortable, but the defense picked up the slack. After each win Art Shell told us that the team did okay but that they still were making too many mistakes and failing to complete plays and games. He kept to his previous schedule, ignored by the media, that he couldn't see this team being where it should be until some time around mid season.

But Shell spent the off-season working with Ryan, and shoring up his defense. He got Ryan the SS he'd been missing, and speedy LBs. And while it always seemed like Ryan was trying to put together a defense designed to stop the run, this unit has quietly become the most dynamic pass defense in football while the run defense is just beginning to put it all together. If Shell's schedule stays on track, although it still looks like more time is required, the Raiders, even after losing their first five in a row, might just make a run at it. If they falter, they have still built a solid foundation to work from with a greatly improved running game.

When Shell feels lonely, he no doubt seeks out the comfort from the second loneliest man in the NFL, Tom Walsh. Walsh has taken nothing but hammering because of his bed and breakfast management. But Walsh's role, it seems to me, has been largely missunderstood. When Shell was brought back Walsh was charged with reestablishing Raider tradition on offense. The only explanation from Shell has been "he knows what I want." After twelve years of switching back and forth between WC and Vertical, the Raiders had lost their identity of run hard and throw deep. Walsh was brought back because of the years of experience he gained while working within that offensive identity for the Raiders. I don't believe Walsh was brought here so much to run the offense as to teach others how it's supposed to work.

Consider that every time the Raiders huddle up, two plays are communicated to Walter, and he is charged with surveying the opposing defense and selecting from the two. Generally, one would believe, Walter is given a running play and a pass play. Right away, Walsh gives up the most important aspect of play calling, for it is Walter who must decide between the ground and the air. This system seems designed to teach Walter to call his own plays, and eventually only to take advice from an OC. Early reports from camp indicated that Walsh was meeting with his QBs in order to teach them the finer points of improvisation in case the called play breaks down. There is no question that this will take time for both Walter and Brooks to learn, because the trend in the NFL since the mid 1980s has been to take the QBs mind off of strategy so that he can just focus on mechanics. Eventually Walter will have to meld the two together and make his body do what his mind is thinking. The three greatest Raider regular QBs all had this ability, Stabler, Plunkett, and Gannon.

The most remarkable thing about Art Shell is that he has held this team together in spite of the losing, and in spite of the distractions. Every Shell decision has been examined and criticized. He was criticized as a tired old retread when hired, then praised as a god during camp. When the season started, and after only losing the first game, he was dubbed incompetent and the architect of one of the worst teams in the history of professional football. Early on, when disciplining players, he was praised. Then he was criticized again for being consistent with that discipline. He has been called stupid, emotionless, and unreasonably strict.

There are rumors that Art Shell is here to stay. Not necessarily as the Raiders coach, but to run the team when Al Davis becomes incapable of doing so. If that is true, Art Shell is the best choice of all. He is the best purveyor of the Raider Tradition, and he will run this team accordingly. But for him to keep this team together through losing five straight to start the season, through the Porter ridiculousness, through the Moss enjoyment "of life," through the unfair, unreasonable, and idiotic criticism by the media, he has shown himself to be NFL gold.
With four games against division rivals left to be played, it is unlikely that the Raiders will make the playoffs unless they sweep those games. But there is a foundation there to do it where the press claimed there was nothing but ashes. That's because the press never stands around long enough to wait to see what might rise out of those ashes.

Welcome to BlandaRocked!

2006-10-29T17:11:00.000-08:00

This blog is dedicated to the Oakland Raiders. Much of what I write here will be an attempt to provide a perspective that the press will not. I’ve learned a great deal about the Raider organization over the years. This knowledge comes from searching diligently for relevant news that the media neglects in favor of “conventional wisdom.” No need for the entire story about that here. It will come out over time, I’m sure, while attempting to explain a position I’ve taken to a disagreeing Raiders fan. For now, it is enough to say that I’ve been an avid Raiders fan since the Fall of 1969, the year following the Raiders’ first Super Bowl appearance.

Game Seven

The Pittsburg Steelers are the worst team in the history of the world. They take the crown from the Arizona Cardinals who were the holders last week. Next week, the Seattle Seahawks are potentially the future worst team in the history of the world. Sorry Steeler fans. I really respect the Steelers, and your guys did us credit by not playing us as though we'd be a push over.

Congratulations to PantyRaider for correctly predicting, in the week leading up to the game against the Cardinals, that the Raiders would win their next two home games. I actually thought that the Raiders would lose this one, but by a close score in a low scoring game.

Randy Moss missed two more. Shell brought Jerry Porter back, no doubt, because of all of these unauthorized substitutions of someone who’s “just enjoying life.” Randy will make a few catches, and then turn it over to the guy who’s “just enjoying life.” Shell seems to have called it exactly right. When Porter made his one catch, the guy who’s “just enjoying life” took a swipe at it and whiffed, allowing Porter to make the catch.

It was good to see Porter make that catch. Welcome back, Jerry. Your activation, the week after you returned from suspension, should be all the peace that is required between you and Shell. Now let’s all work together and see if we can do better than 98 yards on offense next week.

Although you wouldn’t know it from the stats, the Raiders’ offense again progressed. They made mistakes, but they didn’t make game changing mistakes. It was clear from the first quarter onward that the Steelers were going to take advantage of Oakland’s weak offensive line. Walsh and Shell took the position that the running game, even without the threat of the pass, was working enough to at least maintain the possession of the ball.

Gallery played better. It was Langston Walker who was getting beat all day. I’d like to see McQ get a good look in that spot.

One thing the Raiders offenses of 2003, 2004, and 2005 didn’t have that the offense of 2006 does have? They have a defense that watches their backs. This was, without a doubt, the best overall performance by the defense since the team returned from Los Angeles.

If I’d had a blog then, sometime during preseason I’d have predicted that Nnamdi Asomugha would become a shut down corner for the Raiders. Lester Hayes is a corner I was able to watch during his entire development. Hayes used to use the preseason to see exactly how much he could get away with. He’d play with the boundaries of pass interference just to see how close he could come without getting flagged. I watched Asomugha do that several times during the preseason. When you have so much control that you can play with the edges like that, you’re something special.

Failing to learn from history...

2006-08-30T12:07:00.000-07:00

In 1977, Jim Plunkett was the source of every problem the 49ers ever had, according to the local press. He was the worst acquisition in the history of the franchise. He was signed to take the 49ers to the promised land after several losing seasons. While he had been a Heisman trophy winner, his professional career had remained suspect. He failed to be the option Quarterback that New England had envisioned when they drafted him, lacking the speed to be a running Quarterback. But San Francisco picked him up believing that he still had a strong arm, and bringing him home might just reignite his career, so long as he had the courage to stand in the pocket and throw deep balls. Unfortunately the 49ers lacked any semblance of an offensive line, and they had fired three coaches in three years. On any typical passing play, Plunkett would take the ball from under center, take about two of his three or five steps back, duck, and then get swarmed over by the defense. The local press burned that in order for the 49ers to get any better, Plunkett would have to go. So Plunkett was released, and he sat out of football for the next year. His career was over. He was just another Heisman washout.

In 1978, Al Davis, a constant admirer of Jim Plunkett's throwing arm, invited Plunkett to come join the Raider's franchise with the season in progress. Davis didn't ask Plunkett to play, he asked him to sit on the bench and watch. Meanwhile there was an outcry in Raiderland that Al Davis had done something really stupid. There was talk of friction between Davis and Kenny Stabler, and the fear in Raiderland was that Al might be considering replacing Stabler with a washed out loser. In 1978 the Raiders missed the play offs for the first time in over a decade. It seemed that everything was about to crumble in Raiderland, and that Plunkett was about to oversee the destruction of both Bay Area franchises. The news got worse when John Madden resigned for health reasons. Tom Flores, the former Raider Quarterback and then Quarterbacks coach took over. Flores, the first Hispanic head coach in the NFL, was relatively unknown. Flores duplicated Madden's last year (1978) by going 9-7 (in 1979) and missing the playoffs again.

Davis' problems with Stabler came to a head prior to the 1980 season, and Davis solved his problem by trading straight across with Houston for Dante Pastorini, the strong armed and scrappy Oiler. But Raiderland was indeed crumbling. Due to interference from the NFL, negotiations of a new contract for the Oakland Coliseum collapsed, and Davis announced that March that the franchise would be moving to Los Angeles in 1981. With the team in disarray, a new coach and quarterback, and everything dangling in uncertainty, the Raiders began the 1980 season 1-3. Then something remarkable happened. Dan Pastorini broke his leg, and Jim Plunkett came off the bench.

We all know the rest. Jim Plunkett engineered one of the most remarkable comebacks in the history of professional sports, as he led the Raiders to a Super Bowl win that year - and then again in 1983. And thus a Bay Area pariah was transformed into a national hero. Thus, another "stupid" Al Davis acquisition became hailed for its brilliance.

"It's a precaution for us to bring a guy like that in because you can lose a quarterback, and then, when you lose one, you have to have somebody ready to go. Even if he doesn't stick with us, there'll be somebody out there that knows a little bit about our system." This is very similar to what the organization was saying about Jim Plunkett in 1978, but it is currently what Art Shell has to say about the acquisition of Jeff George, current Bay Area pariah, while the Bay Area is clamoring about another "stupid" Al Davis acquisition.

There is much to the downside of Jeff George, just as there was much to the downside of Jim Plunkett. But men of such remarkable talents always have the potential to accomplish something seemingly miraculous. I am a life long Raider fan largely because Al Davis has the courage to make these kinds of moves. I ask all of those who are currently on the side of the "another stupid Al Davis acquistion" ledger, what will you say if Jeff George finds an opportunity with the Raiders to prove his talent, to accomplish a miracle? Will you disregard the accomplishment because you "were right about Jeff George all along" in blaming him for the debacle of 1997?

People change. They discover things as they get older. George has said his return reminds him of Vince Evans. He said the team always refered to Evans as the old man, and George never wanted to be that old man. And now he is. According to reports, George destroyed his own career by being arogant and aloof. But listen to him now. "(Shell) just said, 'Hey, come in here and be yourself, come out here and throw the ball like we know you can, and just do what we tell you to do,' and that's all I wanted, whether they put me fourth-, third-string, second-string, whatever I have to do. I keep saying, I'm just thankful to be back in the league and given the opportunity to prove that I belong."

I will not complain or argue with anyone Al Davis puts on the Raider bench. He owns that right, but more, he has earned that right with the acquisition of Jim Plunkett among others. I don't know if Jeff George will ever have his "Jim Plunkett moment," but what if he does? Davis has a considerable record for presenting me with that kind of entertainment. So welcome, Jeff George. Make yourself comfortable on the Raider bench. Watch what we're doing here now. Perhaps your moment will come. Maybe it won't. If it does, you will have my complete attention.

It is said that those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it. Mr. Davis, keep failing to learn the lessons from the history of James Jett so that you will continue to be condemned to repeat the history of Jim Plunkett.