Sunday, October 29, 2006

Five Postgame Takes

1. This didn’t happen overnight. For those who have been watching (as opposed to those who have simply been hating), the game against the Broncos in Denver was pivotal. The Raiders were supposed to get walloped in the Rocky Mountains, yet they kept it close. Around that time, our defense started to climb the charts as one of the NFL’s highest rated units against the pass. Then the Cardinals flew into town, right after carving up the Bears’ vaunted defense, and got shot out of the sky. At that point, the Raiders Haters held onto the “lowly Cardinals” angle for dear life. Now they are simply slack jawed, because they didn’t see this coming, because they weren’t paying attention to the progress of this team, particularly on defense. This victory doesn’t mean that the Raiders are suddenly playoff contenders. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t work to do. But it does mean that a lot of pieholes—particularly those screaming the Raiders will go 0-16! The Raiders are the worst team in the NFL! The Raiders are one of the worst teams in history!—are now firmly shut, with a big plate of crow on their Monday morning breakfast menu.

2. When good news meets bad news: Chris Carr alone outgained and outscored our offense.

3. It was a blast to watch the big, bad Steelers defense lose its composure with two unsportsmanlike conduct calls for 30 yards on one drive in the third quarter. Our offense wasn’t exactly menacing. But Justin Fargas was pounding those guys, if not for big yards, then for extra yards. It was straight-up, smash-mouth running, and the Steel Curtain momentarily broke into tears. Priceless.

4. Ahh, the Raiders Haters in the media are so predictable. Here’s the lead paragraph (thanks to X for the heads up) to the Associated Press recap of today’s game: “As putrid as the Oakland Raiders
were to start the season, they're now at least as good—or is it bad?—as the Super Bowl champs.” Shortly thereafter, we read: “Pittsburgh did their best impression of the Raiders by committing four turnovers, four personal fouls and allowing five sacks.”

Of course, all the Steelers did over the previous two weeks was score 83 total points against the Chiefs and the Falcons. Of course, this same wire service wrote the following after the Steelers beat the Chiefs: “
The NFL now must be wondering how much better the Super Bowl champions can be after a convincing all-is-well performance.”

But no, in the wake of a second consecutive convincing victory in Oakland, we are simply reminded that the Raiders were (and by implication, still are) "putrid," and that the World Champion Pittsburgh Steelers are suddenly…the Cardinals reincarnated! Allow me, then, to correct our friendly wire service and rewrite their lead paragraph to today's game: “After scoring 83 points over their previous two games, the Pittsburgh Steelers looked to further regain their championship swagger in Oakland today. But their hopes were dashed by a resurgent Raiders defense that forced four turnovers, including two interceptions that were returned for touchdowns."

Meanwhile, over at Fox Sports, they are no doubt diligently working on the New New Math after ranking the Raiders dead last in the NFL, two slots behind the Cardinals—after the Raiders trounced the Cardinals! They also ranked the Steelers at 14th prior to today’s game. Keep an eye on these guys. I think we just might slip to 33rd after today.

5. Our defense, special teams, running backs (Fargas for sure) and quarterback are definitely on track. I'm still concerned about our receivers and our offensive line, for reasons that are plain to see. Our playcalling still makes me wonder at times, too. Walter is still good for at least one huge blunder per game, which goes with the young QB territory. I can live with that. More problematic is the fact that his performance is still being sabotaged by dropped balls and alligator arms at precisely the wrong times (hello, Randy and Courtney). But why dwell on the negatives when Rob "Caveman" Ryan's defense has just delivered a masteful performance, both in terms of energy and execution? Simply epic. And credit goes to the entire team for stepping up, for erasing five weeks of sour with two weeks of sweetness. This is the stuff of character, of pride. The plot is definitely thickening.


Blogger RaiderRealist said...

Well said RT! I tried to make the same point about the nattering nabobs and I think people misunderstood. That's why I mentioned a show in LA called SportsCentral. All season long I've heard them gleefully run their spiel about the Raiders. Sunday the Raiders SHUT DOWN the Steelers for a full 4 quarters. No the offense didn't do much, but the defense pulled everybody's weight. This game reminds me of two previous games: the Bears win over Arizona where the defense and special teams did the heavy lifting, and Art Shell's first win as HC back in 1989. The Raiders beat the Jets on MNF 14-7, and the defense did all the scoring there too. We're not where we want to be, but we're sure headed on the right road. I just wish that our receivers would catch more passes instead of letting the ball ricochet off them into the defender's hands. Next up is a trip to see our old AFC West rivals the Seahawks.

11:11 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Great Postgame Takes RT.

Robert Thomas (LB) was an unsung hero today. He made 2 key back to back stops when Pittsburgh was on the goal line.

1-1 on Oak 1 (2:59)
W.Parker up the middle for no gain. Tackled by R.Thomas

2-1 on Oak 1 (2:24)
N.Davenport off R guard. Loss of 4 yards. Tackled by R.Thomas.

Our Rock'em, Sock'em D played AWESOME. 4 interceptions, 2 TDs, 5 sacks, 2 goal line stands, 0 points for Pitt, 7 for Oakland.

One story line that you probably won't see from the mainstream media is how the Raiders aggressive D completely rattled Rothliesberger.

Robert Thomas in limited play has looked good all year long. He has a real nose for the football and is a solid tackler. Is it time he replaced MIA S.Williams?

11:52 PM  
Blogger Doobie said...

Great take, RT. You have to wonder at what point does Walter take charge of this team, pull Moss aside and give him an earful, "rookie" QB or not.

Unfortunately, the Raiders are still lacking in the media respect department. However, that's something that can be remedied by:
a. a three game win streak
b. culminated by a prime time Monday Night Football win next week
c. on the road
d. over the OTHER Super Bowl XL team

Should the Raiders beat the Seahawks next week, the media had better be talking about the resurgence of the Raiders, or at least their defense.

5:38 AM  
Blogger nyraider said...

Game balls to the entire "D"!!!They played fast and aggressive, and pass coverage was phenomenal. There were many pass plays that Rothliesberger simply didn't have anywhere to go with the ball.

98 yards and his self-proclaimed "pathetic personal performance" aside, Andrew Walter did a great job of protecting the ball. With six sacks and constant pressure, he held his ground and the ball. (Okay, one bad pass into coverage could have cost us, but he is maturing fast.)

Unfortunately, he's not getting the help he deserves from his line and receivers. Most of all, it's getting really tiring to watch Randy Moss short-arm good passes. Maybe he should switch playing status with Porter (before this week) and we can leave Whitted in there. At least with Whitted we know we're getting 100% effort. Okay, Whitted isn't going to draw m-any double coverages, but neither is Moss if he continues to play the way he has.

I watched the game surrounded by screaming Steelers fans. None of them were proclaiming the Raiders ineptness. How sweet it is!

5:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's the old addage that we have heard since '02?
We knew this would be a tough game offensively because we were playing a tough Steelers' defense with a rookie QB starting. The one thing everyone is forgetting is that Rothlesberger has a concussion, and they expected to roll in and take us down. They were not expecting the Raiders to play this type of defense. They came in figuring that the Raiders Defense would be on the field all day, and buckle under the "magic" of Rothlesberger.
Our defense knocked him off his tricycle, and sent him home crying.

6:44 AM  
Blogger Joaquin said...

Bring out the Terrible Towels to dry your tears.
I wonder how many ankles will be broken jumping off that Steeler bandwagon?

9:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Love your re-write of the Associated Press' lead paragraph, the way it should have been written in the first place. No Pro-Raider bias, just accurate reporting, without the Raider Hater bias.

9:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I go back a long way with the Raiders. And the defense I saw in the last two games remindes me of the 70's with Hayes, Haynes, Brown, Hendircks, Sistrunk et al.

People flying to the ball and when they hit, they hit like Jack Tatum. Just think, only 2 starters have more than 4 years experience.

10:23 AM  
Blogger nyraider said...


I agree 100%. Just think how good this team can be when the offense catches up. Many young players on that side of the ball too. Although, I still cringe every time I think of the Doug Gabriel "trade".

10:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

raider D plays a great game and lead the team to a good win versus a hapless Steeler club and what do you do? Cry about the media. WOW! you are truly a whining, crying BITCH! Again I say.... Who the hell cares what the media writes or says? GET A LIFE

10:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i love this quote from sapp. i took it from inside bay

"Maybe Tom Walsh was fixing a breakfast when I scored those touchdowns," Sapp said.

11:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great game. But to chime in on the media front. There's no such thing as bad press. We're the Oakland Raiders, we are always a big story. Whether we're on our way to our fifth superbowl or starting the season 0-5 following three years of dismal football. The fact that we get so much more attention than all the other 2-5 teams should be a compliment, even if most of the attention is negative.

As for the game, wow. Rob Ryan has built a monster here during the past few years and if Shell can find an offensive coordinator and O-line coach or convince the current ones to achieve that kind of attitude, determination and chemistry on the other side of the ball we have the youth and talent to make some runs here in the next few years. I also like how we've shed alot of talent that should of hurt us but hasn't, mainly Charles Woodson and Ted Washington. And credit to Warren Sapp who could be pulling a Moss and complain about the losses but instead has persevered.

I'm also not ready to write off Walsh and the offense, they haven't been together as long as Ryan and the defense. Yes, some of the play calling has been weak but the running game has improved somewhat which is either better O-line play, Fargas or a combination of both.

Lastly, I miss Doug Jolley.

11:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This game actually brought up a good question among me and my friends. Could Brooks had done better?? A week ago we were sure Walter was the guy. This week made it a bit more cloudy.

Considering Brooks will probably take a few games to shake the rust off (a few games the Raiders cant afford). We may never know what Brooks brings to the table.

11:46 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anon-Brooks would not be better in my opinion--in light of that pressure I think he would not have protected the ball as well as Walter. The offensive gameplan was bad-- a step back after last week and more like the SD game. More screens, more rollouts needed--and none of that will be any good if receivers don't catch the ball. That said, the run D was the highlight of the game for me. The D is ready to take their show on the road; hopefully the O will catch [pun intended] up soon.

12:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Awesome game! I think it was their most impressive performance since '02. I'm still down on Walsh but it must be pointed out that if Turner or Callahan's teams were at 0-5 they would have folded. The fact that the Raiders are still fighting and getting better is a testament to Art Shell.

To those of you who are saying that Walter needs to get rid of the ball faster, maybe so, but consider his coaching. With this system, Shell has said the Raider QBs don't have a "clock" in their head like just about every other QB. They are taught to hold the ball until someone breaks open. It's Jurassic football and it needs an updating if our offense is ever going to catch up to our defense, unless you like the idea of 35 sacks through 7 games (ugh!). At least Walter is being given a chance to prove that his durability is not an issue!

I love Shell but I really don't expect to see Walsh running this offense next year. Seattle's up next and they are giving up a lot of yards AND points, Walsh better pick it up if he wants to be part of the future here. Friendship with Art will only take him so far in my opinion.

1:02 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

I think it will be awhile before we see Brooks back out there. While he's been injured, he hasn't been working with the offense either. Whenever he's healthy, you can expect Walter to get at least one game more after that with the chance to nail down the job permanently - if it's not already his in Shell's mind.

I posted another entry over at BlandaRocked regarding Shell and Walsh.

1:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

a few takes of my own.....

i guess i should shut the f up about that 0-16 season eh? not to justify but this walsh thing is getting very old. its the frustrations that come out when i say that crap. COME ON! chad slaughter as a receiver in that goal line situation? our BEST receivers should have been out there.

i still feel and always will feel the same way about the old fart. i'll just ease up a bit for now.

lk - more screen plays? they can't even do ONE decently!

the place was absolutely electrified by carr's pick/return for td. WOW.

in the beginning of the year i and others said that this team needs an identity. if they weren't gonna draft leinart, then what was their identity? here it is - the defense. they are coming together slowly. they do not quite have the level of the bears or ravens or chargers for that matter but they are coming together.

shell should continue to keep thing simple for walter as he grows and matures into an nfl qb. forget about brooks. continue to play it safe and just let the kid do enough not to lose the game.

someone PLEASE answer this question: WHY is courtney anderson playing in the nfl?

2:15 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

The defense has reclaimed the swagger! Is it contageous? As Sapp once described an NFL team, the defense is now a fellowship of men. They work together, plan together, party together... Will this begin to spill into the offense now that the Jerry Porter problem appears to have been resolved at least until season's end? Let's hope that at least the OL and the backfield start to form a fellowship, and soon... If we can score 17 points each and every game from now on - we'll take a run at the playoffs.

3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a huge win for the Raiders.

There's no doubt that this was a must win for the Steelers. Bill Cower, & many of their players said as much leading up to the game.

It was such a big game for them, that they started Rothlisberger in spite of his getting his bell rung last week.

So there's no way they were overlooking us, or anything like that.

It was good to see the Raiders defense ready for the challenge.
They beat the hell out of Pitts. all day long. I loved watching it.

The offensive game plan, however, seemed a little timid to say the least.
Walter attempted only 14 passes all day, and the Raiders offense has now not scored a TD for 6 quarters.

The problems with the line, and receivers, have got to be looked into more deeply. They should have made more gains by now.

Still, it sure is nice to wake up Monday morning a winner.

4:54 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...


Wondered what happened to you today. We're up at BlandaRocked.

5:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Raider Rick,

I agree that the O-line has not been very good, but there is more to the sack problem then this.

It seems to me that the lack of any kind of short passing game is really hurting young QB Walter.

When he goes back to pass, he is stuck if Moss, Curry, or Porter is not open quickly.

There just is no Fullback, or halfback to dump it to, and no TE with reliable hands to catch a short one.

The option for Walter to look underneath would go a long way in cutting down on the sacks

8:10 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Raider 00 - Good point about the lack of a short passing game and safety valves for AW. It seemed that Walter & Walsh had a nice groove in the Cards game. The short passes on 1st down set up quite a few, long productive drives. For whatever reason, the playcalling took a timid, u-turn vs. the Steelers.

9:51 PM  
Blogger nyraider said...

I'm not trying to defend Tom Walsh's game planning or play calling, but one thing that's being overlooked in questioning why no outlet receivers are available for Andrew Walter is that an aggressive "D" like the Steelers force us to use RBs and TEs to help our "below-average" O-line block. The same thing happened against the Chargers, and other teams obviously went to school on that game.

That said, I can't explain why Walsh didn't use roll-outs or why we can't seem to properly execute a screen pass...???

PantyRaider: I agree with you that it's time to draft a "BigBadMeanSlammin RB". Dude, you have quite a flair for getting your point across. Keep up the good work.

5:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nyraider, I understand the point about keeping the backs in. But short passes that the QB gets off before the blitzers can reach him is the way to make them pay for constantly blitzing. It worked in '02, ask Gannon!

5:57 AM  
Blogger StickUm25 said...

To second nyraider’s point, I think there are factors other than Walsh that contribute to the play calling. I’m wondering how much experience Walter has facing a 3-4 – I don’t know that there were many chances to face that alignment in college, and the top defenses we’ve played this year use that scheme. If Walter is having trouble diagnosing coverages and calling protection schemes we’re going to be limited in what we can do.

For Pittsburgh specifically, with the number of turnovers we’ve had this year I’d be hesitant to throw short as well – if a LB drops back and picks it off it can easily go back for 6. Despite the lack of yardage we only had one turnover – that was huge in terms of field position and morale of the defense.

The lack of production from the tight end is killing us. Keeping them in to block isn’t helpful in the type of offense Shell likes to run. With the number of drops they’ve had, however, it doesn’t do any good to send them out. The drops are not only affecting down and distance, but they’re preventing Walter from getting into a rhythm, which in turns prevents him from gaining confidence. I’m willing to be that is influencing the patterns they call for Moss. He’s never been an over-the-middle guy, but they’re using him for those short routes that should go to the TE. It’s not helping that he’s dropping balls either. Jordan caught a lot of balls last year, but he drops way too many to be a reliable option, and I don’t think any of our other backs are big receiving threats. I think this is the main thing preventing us from developing a decent short game. Hopefully Porter will get more time and take over those plays – right now I see that as the only hope. It seems Curry is destined to be the third receiver, which is a shame.

8:47 AM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

I agree with Stickem25 completely on this one. The unimaginative offense was specifically to reduce the chance of turnovers, knowing that the Steeler's defense would be head hunting all day.

9:42 AM  
Blogger nyraider said...

mad stork 83:

I also agree with your point, but it's possible this offense is too narrowly focused to install the kind of dynamic that includes components of the Gannon-era offense.

It's also possible that our offensive scheme doesn't really suit our personnel. We're probably better off right now to run more of a WC style offense... at least in the short-term until our line gets better with longer sets.

Ironically, the offense may have a similar problem that Rob Ryan had his first year when trying to install a 3-4 defense, i.e., the personnel (particularly LBs) didn't really match the system.

The big difference here is: don't expect the offensive coaches to make the proper adjustments, look for them to force the players to make the adjustments... because they don't seem anxious to abandon their offensive philosophy too quickly. Can't say that I totally agree with that, but I do believe the WC offense has left the building, and it ain't coming back (too soon anyway).

10:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with the last posts--sorta. At some point Walter has to get to the right play and I didn't see alot of that last Sunday. The week before his teammates complimented him on checking to the right play...but I still haven't seen the slants and pop passes to the TE's and screens that nullify the rush [Pittsburgh's TD was a screen against a blitz] and that can be audibled to easily. Leads me to believe these checks may not be in the playbook??? Yikes!

11:50 AM  
Blogger Penny Distribution said...

nyraider: I agree with your point that they're trying to put a square peg in a round hole with the offense, but that was always going to be the case this year. You still have to produce something.

I also concur with the Blandarocked assessment of the offensive play-calling on Sunday...Since we had the lead most of the game, it was designed strictly to reduce the turnovers given up to the Steelers, and the short game suffered....I think the playcalling stayed that way as it looked like the D had the answer all day. But looking to the future, I think the Offense can afford to take a few more chances early knowing the D has it's back, and I believe it will

Needless to say, this won't cut it all year, especially with SD & the Donks. The key here, sorry to say, is Porter. The Steelers keyed in on "3rd & Ron" (Curry) on each 3rd down except the play to Porter with the 2nd half winding down. We were very successful on 3rd down against The Cards, and if we can play a 3 wide-receiver set with Curry, Porter and Moss, it's going to be difficult for most defenses to prevent either Porter or Curry getting open.

The key here is, as always, a strong running game. With the Steelers keyed on the run with the secs ticking away last Sunday, we still managed to get into a 3rd & 1 situation after running 3 straight times. A 1st down would've finished the game off, and although we didn't get it, opponents will have to respect the run from now on. Fargas is one tackle away from breaking a big one almost every play. I'd like to see more 2nd and 1st down play-action calls because of this and I think we will.

12:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Horsecollar, & Blandarocks,

"The offense was designed to limit turnovers" What ??????

Whatever happened to "We take what we want" ???????

Only 14 pass attempts the whole game. No TD's by our offense for 6 straight quarters.

Are we good enough to sit on our leads yet ???

Still, I'm not ready to dump on Walsh just yet.
It could be he would like to design passes for the FB, HB, & TE. There is just no one on the roster at this point in time that fills the role.

These are definate area's of concern for free agents, & draft O-linemen as well.

1:21 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...


"We take what we want," is currently our goal, not our reality. But the process has started. By running the ball the whole game, we said, "we're going to run on you all day." Because of our stout defense, the Steelers didn't stop it sufficiently to obtain a W.

Also, we know that Walsh has designed the short passes, because we've already seen them. We just don't run those consistently. I think it will get better with the return of Porter. We still have Moss going deep, and Porter will be there for the slants and the medium over the middle stuff instead of Whitted. However, running the screens has consistently blown up in our faces because of the OL being unable to find their blocks.

Also, in this offense, the flat is not a viable option when avoiding the blitz packages. There is too much bad that can happen there. The receiver must be wide open. If he's not, an interception will be a touchdown.

I think in the off season, we'll be looking for two OLinemen in free agency. We need to replace Walker at RT for sure, and Gallery should be moved to G if he is unable to find his footing at LT.

1:59 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

Hey, RT:

Hold on to your Raider Shield hat! The Raiders have now risen to number 25 on the power rankings. The worst team in the history of professional football is now at 25. That means there are 7 teams worse than the worst team in the history of professional football.

3:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think the Raiders' Offensive scheme was designed to "just get past the Steelers," and if so, it still failed!
91 total yards, no touchdowns, 1 Interception (really expectted more with the Pittsburgh D). That is not working.
I know the Pittsburgh Defense is rough, and punch you in the face type football, and that we have a young QB at the helm; but that's no excuse for the lack of offensive production by the Raiders!
Don't believe me? Ask Andrew Walter! "It was probably the worst performance by an offensive unit that I've ever been a part of," confirmed quarterback Andrew Walter. "It was one of those games where you just didn't want to screw it up for them (the defense), and we almost did. The defense won the game, bottom line. The offense played terrible. Personally, it was ridiculous. As a unit, ridiculous. How well we ran the ball, c'mon, we should be able to do a lot more, and we didn't do anything. Obviously, I'm pretty disgusted. A win's a win, but as a unit, that's not going to get it done ever ... except for today." (taken from
I also gave a quote from Warren Sapp that says it all as well earlier, and from the same story. NFL Teams do not game plan "just to get by," and if you do, you shouldn't be coaching in the NFL. You game plan to WIN, NO MATTER WHO YOU PLAY!

5:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hear you guys, and a lot of you are more patient than me with Walsh. But I remember '94 vividly. There were the same valid comments from opponents and commentators caling our offense "vanilla" and "high schoolish". There was the same struggle to protect the passer and open running lanes, even though we had guys like Wiz, Mosebar, and Gogan. There was the same grumbling from the players who were being asked to execute schemes that can no longer be executed. And this was 12 years ago!

Madden, in a classy way, expressed surprise with the hire of Walsh. Davis, in a press conference this past August, said Walsh will allow us to do some things "for the time being". Can we read the writing on the wall? The guy has to be a stopgap.

One of the things that's a shame about this is the fact that Walter is really not getting the experience he needs. Sure he's playing, but how much is he learning in a scheme that doesn't work? What good will his playing time do for him if we hire a different offensive coordinator during the off season?

Our defense is cutting edge and innovative. So are our special teams. They're coached by young, hungry guys. Why should we settle for two out of three? Being innovative and ahead of the curve is what made Al Davis who he is today. Why should we settle for a Jurassic offense?

This defense is ready to win now. I would make a change pronto because the sooner we get on the right track in all three phases of the game, the sooner we return to glory. We're not as far away as a lot of people want to think!

5:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mad Stork
I've said it before, I don't think the Gilman is jurassic. Shannarat (Donkeys), Cowher (Squeal Curtain), Reid (Eagles), Holmgren (Seahags), Bill Walsh (former 9er), the Tuna (Cowgirls), Paython (Saints), and many others use the Gilman to compliment the West Coast, which the 2 together are deadly and unstoppable.
The Colts use both, but more in a "Read-and-React" style of offense. Meaning Peyton lines up, reads the defense, calls the play from the line accordingly. It would be more effective if it worked in the post-season.
I don't think it is the style of offense that is "Jurassic" as much as it is the incompetence of the OC who doesn't know how to impliment the system effectively.
Big difference.
I have no confidence in Walsh.

11:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mad Stork
I've said it before, I don't think the Gilman is jurassic. Shannarat (Donkeys), Cowher (Squeal Curtain), Reid (Eagles), Holmgren (Seahags), Bill Walsh (former 9er), the Tuna (Cowgirls), Paython (Saints), and many others use the Gilman to compliment the West Coast, which the 2 together are deadly and unstoppable.
The Colts use both, but more in a "Read-and-React" style of offense. Meaning Peyton lines up, reads the defense, calls the play from the line accordingly. It would be more effective if it worked in the post-season.
I don't think it is the style of offense that is "Jurassic" as much as it is the incompetence of the OC who doesn't know how to impliment the system effectively.
Big difference.
I have no confidence in Walsh.

11:02 AM  
Blogger Penny Distribution said...

Madstork: Good points all. I'd accept the need to get things going i the 3 phases quicker...I have no experience of the '94 Raiders so I'm in no position to contradict you. However, playing-time is playing time for Walter. Look at what Gannon was capable of doing being a Journey-man before joining Oakland. He was only able to jump into other offensive schemes after extensive playing time of his own.

If this offense doesn't show improvement over the next (difficult) stretch of 4 games, I'll be calling for Walsh's head as well. Till then, I'll bide my time.

11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Raider Nate:

I hear you but there isn't one "Gillman" playbook that all these guys are using. The Gillman style of offense has continued to evolve every year. Parcells uses different formations than Shanahan, etc. etc. Does the Gillman philosophy of stretching the field and power running still work? Absolutely. But these guys all have their own interpretations of how to acheive that objective. To my eyes, Walsh's version of the Gillman offense was a bit behind the times in '94 and it's way behind now. So I agree, the "style" is fine. The implementation is clearly not working.


Agreed, playing time is better than bench time for Walter. The shame of it is that if we had the right coordinator he'd be learning more and he (and we) would be ahead in the learning curve...

12:14 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Let me share a very interesting (and telling)observation Raider 00 brought up on my site ... the Raiders lack of 2nd half production. After checking the numbers, here are the alarming numbers:

In the 7 games played to date, the Raiders offense has scored only 1 2nd half touchdown. 1! The points scored by the offensive unit game by game goes as follows;

Game 1 = 0 points (0-27 SD)
Game 2 = 3 points (6-28 Balt)
Game 3 = 0 points (21-24 Clev)
Game 4 = 7 points (20-34 SF)
Game 5 = 3 points (3-13 Den)
Game 6 = 3 points (22-13 AZ)
Game 7 = 3 points (20-13 Pitt)

Our offensive avg. production is 2.7 points per 2nd half. This clearly shows our OC's incompetence in making the necessary adjustments at half time.

8:06 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home