Sunday, November 26, 2006

One Postgame Take

Well, can we get credit for consistency? Three straight games against AFC West rivals, three losses by a grand total of 15 points. My take on this game is almost identical to last week’s game against the Chiefs. We played a tough divisional rival with a dominant running back. Our defense kept us in the game. Aaron Brooks masterfully eluded pressure. We didn’t make good adjustments in the second half. Brooks got picked. And, for the seventh straight game, we didn’t score more than 17 points. People get upset when I focus on the positives. Well, I’ve covered the negatives. They’re the same every game. The positive is our defense, and that fact that this team, under challenging circumstances amid a lost season, is still keeping things close and still playing to win. Remember Kerry Collins shuffling to the line like a zombie against the Dolphins exactly one year ago (November 27, 2005)? I feel much better about this team, at this time, this year. Call me crazy.

P.S. I, too, was disgusted by that “illegal forward pass” nonsense. Against Seattle it was our guy allegedly barking signals to confuse their defense. Against Denver, it was Chris Carr allegedly staying out of bounds too long. Every week seems to bring some weird foul or creative interpretation of the rules. The zebras are thieves. However…this particular fumble was a clown’s gift, not something that we really earned in the field of play (like, say, Brady’s “tuck” fumble in the playoffs). I’m not happy about the call. But I can’t blame our loss on it.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am just at a loss for words. I mean we played hard, but we must play harder regardless. Because we all know that the entire nfl entity is always against us.

I am just glad that our season will end soon so we can address our off season. Shell and Walsh must go, I don't care about what Shell brings to the table at this point I want results. Superbowl results.

9:54 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

The "illegal forward pass" play/ruling is the least of my concerns.

What really bothered me about this game was the Brooks' interception. Some Raider fans might think the following statement is unfair but this is what I believe ... Pin the loss entirely on Brooks. If he doesn't make this bad read, bad throw, bad decision, the Raiders go up by 2 scores with about 13:00 to go in the game.

As a veteran QB, he needs to be aware of the down, distance, clock, and score. This is basic game management. Brooks' interception was the reason we lost this game. If he simply did the prudent thing (throw the ball away) we go up 17-7 and keep firm control over the final outcome.

9:55 PM  
Blogger RaiderRealist said...

Calico Jack

I don't think you can pin this one entirely on Brooks. The ball was tipped at the line of scrimmage, taking a lot of zip off the throw. Also, how about the defense getting burned by that halfback toss which we've seen how many times before?

Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Janikowski makes that field goal attempt when he blew an easy one on the first drive of the game.

This loss really hurt because we actually had the Chargers on their heels for 3.5 quarters. We even scored in the second half which has been our Mt. Everest to overcome. We just couldn't close the game out. It was a team loss, plain and simple.

12:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good for you for not blaming this loss on the officials. That was a ridiculously bad call, but it's not the entire reason we lost the game.

And I don't blame Brooks completely either. It's 3rd and 15, we're in field goal range. Why another deep drop and slow developing play? Why not a draw or quick hitter up the middle to set up an easy field goal and 17-7 lead? This reminds me of the final game of Shell and Walsh's last tenure, when they decided to get cute against Kansas City and paid for it with an interception returned for a TD.

As much as I admire the way this team fights, history repeats. Schottenheimer coined his whole "the Raiders will fold in the 4th quarter of a close game" mantra during Shell/Walsh I. We're not seeing anything different so far in Shell/Walsh II, and Marty knows it.

This team has a problem rooted in offensive coaching. The competetive nature of our last three games doesn't change that.

5:43 AM  
Blogger StickUm25 said...

Brooks made enough plays - you can't fault him because a D lineman made one in return. While a single play can only be the reason for a loss when it occurs at the end of a game, calls like the "non fumble" do have a huge influence in momentum. At this point we need all the mo we can get in order to win a game.

The play calling was again an issue - I don't think we ran the ball more than 5 times in the second half. We're unable to anticipate and adjust, and until we can do that we're going to be on the short end of a lot of close games.

6:00 AM  
Blogger Joaquin said...

"Good for you for not blaming this loss on the officials. That was a ridiculously bad call, but it's not the entire reason we lost the game."

You must be joking! Right?

Oh, and I love how Calico Jack "blames" the entire loss to 1 interception but the BLOWN CALL is "the least of" his concerns. That's beautiful!
mad stork 83 blames the loss on a deep drop but the BLOWN CALL was no big deal.
Fellas, I crown thee.....................clueless.

6:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to put some blame on the officials on this one. They always come up with some call when the other team is down and the game is close. Aaron Brooks made a terrible throw for the first interception. Those two things cost us the game. The momentum swung the bolts way with the BS call and our D played their asses off, but again A.B., just play smart like a veteran and we win this game!

7:56 AM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

RT: I was too disgusted after that game to even post. I think you're wrong about that bad call not being one we could have claimed an earned victory had it gone the other way. Controlling one's emotions are as much a part of the game as anything else. When players commit personal fouls in the heat of anger, would you have those penalties removed? Of course not.

It's not even so much the bad call. One expects that to happen every once in awhile. But to have the officials sit there and attempt to come up with anything that would allow SD to retain possession of the ball is absurd. This officiating crew actually had to declarify the rule in order to come up with this call. If the play stood as called on the field, nobody would have ever questioned it. Now they will actually have to re-write the rule in order to prevent the boneheaded interpretation. They say the ball was thrown forward, so it's a foward pass? While any idiot can see the player is attempting to spin the ball on the ground, the tape shows that he's actually throwing it toward the sideline, slightly behind the play. Since he put spin on it, it bounced toward the Raiders goal line. Since it bounced toward the Raiders' goal line, it's a "forward pass." Okay then, whenever a player fumbles the ball and it bounces forward, and the player hasn't previously "tucked the ball," I want it ruled a forward pass.

This call even prompts me to go so far as to say this was done intentionally. I'm not saying it's a conspiracy against the Raiders. I think the play was done to aid the Chargers, not to damage the Raiders. Think gambling here.

8:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What confuses me about the “illegal forward pass” play is that even if the call was right, it seems that the penalty wasn’t. According to the NFL’s own web site at, a forward pass thrown from beyond the line of scrimmage results in a five yard penalty AND a loss of down. Even the AP articles focusing on the fact that the “right call” was made have seemed to miss this point. Since the play was still going on, the original line of scrimmage was still in effect. I’m not even a Raiders fan, but I couldn’t believe this. If only they would have had Internet access so that they could have looked this up themselves.

8:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We are simply not good enough offensively to overcome alot of [or even a little of] mistakes, so we have to play near-perfect football to win. Until someone fixes the O to the point we can put up 20+ per game, it's going to be like this. Look at the mistakes--two major defensive lapses, 91 yard kick return allowed, two drive killing holding calls and one dumb challenge by the coaches [it was not smart to challenge the interception return that the DB stepped out of bounds--we only had two time outs left at that point and only hoped to gain ten-fifteen yards of field position. Because we lost that challenge and the timeout that went with it, we didn't have a timeout later when we should have challenged a third down catch that the SD receiver clearly dropped. So instead of a FG attempt SD had a first down and went on to score]. For a team that gave an otherwise solid effort, this shouldn't be too many mistakes to overcome [SD had as many or more], but we just don't have the firepower. Love watching the D play and liking Kevin Boothe more each week....

9:02 AM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Sea-Bass is 11 out 12 inside 49 yards for the season. 91.6%. I will gladly take my chances on him converting a 42 yard FG. Obviously inside your opponent's 30 yard line you never want to take points off the board. This play alone was directly responsible for a 10 point swing.

You are right. Brooks did make some nice plays. However, it seems like he has a knack for making a bad play at the most inopportune time in the game.

These are some of the ore pivotal plays in this game.

- Cromartie kick return
- Asomugha dropped INT
- Sea-Bass missed FG
- Brooks INT
- Illegal Forward Pass play

In my opinion, the Brooks INT had the biggest impact on the final outcome. Without the INT, the "illegal forward pass" never even happens.

9:15 AM  
Blogger nyraider said...

Anon 8:54: the refs don’t need the Internet... They have the rule book. But, it’s the Raiders and, therefore, it’s okay to make up stuff as they go along. Which begs the question: why do the Raiders continue to be the test-case for all bogus rule interpretations? BR wrote: Now they will actually have to re-write the rule in order to prevent the boneheaded interpretation. That about sums it up.

CJ: I believe Raiderrealist is right, the Brooks INT was tipped at the line. However, that doesn’t change the fact that it was a bad read by Brooks, and a bad play call all together. A quick slant or even a running play could have put us in a good position to score three... instead of the usual 4th quarter implosion against a division foe.

9:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brooks pass was tipped man this whole year has just been tough,I don't believe shell must go, I truely believe he is a good coach,I don't know what the answer is,they play hard and still lost....... Die Hard

10:57 AM  
Blogger Joaquin said...

After a "call" like that, I would like to see someone in the Raiders organization grow a pair and pull the players off the field and sit on the sidelines for about 30 minutes. Hell, sit on the helmets for old times sake.
Then I'd like to see what happens when all the networks start cutting to this "breaking news" while playing the play over and over and over.
It would be the longest half hour in the history of the NFL. We would get a HUGE fine, but so what, we would have every fan and every NFL player saying: "Damm, that Raiders organization is a bad bunch of MOFOS"
Guys, I can live with bad calls and missed calls, but this proud organization can not let what happened yesterday go by.

12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Dax, you're saying that call is the ONLY reason we lost the game? And you're calling ME clueless? That play had a huge impact on the game but we were still up 14-7. We still had opportunities to put them away if we had a clue on offense.

And as for sitting it out on the sidelines, maybe we should give each player a blanket and a pacifier too. Nobody would think we're "bad mofos", they'd think we're crybabies.

After the Tuck happened we came out in '02 and ran up the score on everyone to make sure the refs didn't decide another game for us. That's the lesson these players need to learn.

You're right to be pissed at the refs, so am I. But don't fool yourself into thinking that it's the only reason they lost yesterday.

12:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mad Stork, I don't blame the Tuck Rule for that loss either. We still had a chance to shut the Pats down after that call twice. Instead of going with the same blitz that caused the fumble..errr...incomplete pass; we pussy-footed into a prevent-us-from-winning defense.
Just like the Tuck Rule, I'm bent with the call yesterday as well. Like one said earlier, that it should have been 5 yards from the original line of scrimmage, not where the incident happened. Clearly it should have been considered a fumble because the ground did not cause it.
No other team in the history of Football has been screwed out of wins like this.

1:51 PM  
Blogger Joaquin said...

Mad Stork - Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Can you say M O M E N T U M?
I also said that I can live with bad calls and no-calls, but I have a BIG problem with full-blown, game changing, pull it out you a$$, calls.
Hey, you thought that a deep-drop- slow-developing play was game changing. I thought a 4rth and 2 that turned into a TD because of a third party BLOWN CALL had a bit more "impact". I understand Amy Trask had a full-blown $hit fit in the PressBox over "the call". Ah, what does she know?.
Forget me, take a spin around the internet and see what writers and folks that know football are talking about.

"Nobody would think we're "bad mofos", they'd think we're crybabies"

Raiders/standing up for what's right = crybabies?
That's a reach, citizen of Raiders Nation!
Maybe if we continue to get rolled like $5 hookers by BAD CALLS our image will improve? Ya think?

2:05 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

First off, nobody believes more than I do that the Raiders have to be good enough to overcome their mistakes and the refs bad calls. Right now, they're not. That is not the coaches' fault. That is because their offensive personnel aren't good enough, just like they weren't in '04 and '05.

However, these players never give up on a game. Not this one, not all season. This is the coaches' fault. The Raiders gameplanned, based on their talent, good enough to win each of the last three games they've played. That is the coaches' fault. The Raiders are playing competitive games in spite of their two best offensive players taking the season off. That is the coaches' fault. I'm really tired of this meme which has caught on because people don't want to acknowledge the lack of depth or desire among the Raiders' offensive personnel.

Yeah, sure. Walter is a great player and if he fs up it's Walsh's fault. If he does well, it's because he overcame Walsh's stupidity. Enough.

I'm also tired of the idea that when the refs make a blatently unprecidented call, the Raiders should have overcome their own mistakes. How come SD isn't held to that standard? Shouldn't they be required to suffer the results of their mistakes? It's okay if the refs "fix" SD's mistakes for them? Let me just be sure I have the right take on this. Brooks having a pass tipped at the line, subsequently causing it to be intercepted is a stupid call by Walsh and he should be fired. The refs, overcoming a mistake by SD and giving them the needed momentum to win is Walsh's fault for failing to overcome it.

Okay. Then it's a done deal. We'll keep everything the same, but we'll get rid of Walsh. Sounds like a recipe for the Super Bowl to me.

2:07 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...


I agree. The largest hurdle that the Raiders face right now is being able to experience the feeling that they have secured a victory on the basis of their play on the field. In the "tuck" game, that call was critical because the Raiders had won the game, but their defense, instead, was asked to stay on the field and defend a victory that was already theirs. I have no doubt that the Raiders felt the same here. They felt that they survived SD's most assertive drive of the day, and that they could wrap up the win. And I believe they would have won. With these calls, we're talking about things that completely change the face of the game. That is completely demoralizing to any team. Without that call, I don't think SD would have been successful on the HB Option later in the game, because the D overpursued it in reaction to the bad call. The same with Thomlinson's TD run.

2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder what the NFL really knows about the men who officiate their games ?

I mean, think about it. How would they know if someone, or many of them are gambling, or if a relative was gambling ?
There's a lot of money on the table with these games, and it must be very tempting for some Joe nobody, suddenly given the power to control the outcome of all these games. Very tempting indeed.

And it's not just the Raiders. We all saw how Seattle was robbed in the last SB.
And week after week, year, after year, these official's stand in front of camera and make the most unearthly calls known to man.

Not only that, but as soon as a coach, or player, or owner points it out, they are fined to death, and kept silent. How are things suppose to change for the better without talking about it ??

It just seems a little curious by now, is all I'm saying.

Oh well, guess we could all still watch wrasslin' !!!!!!!

3:16 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Dan -

I'm fully aware of the various contributing factors in the game which I outlined in my 9:25 am post.

Maybe the wording of "pinning the entire loss on Brooks" was too strong. These are the main points that I was trying to convey (and still stand by):

(1) The INT was at a critical point in the game
(2) The INT had the biggest negative impact on the final result.

It was a throw that Brooks should never have attempted. He could have easily done 1 of 4 things to avoid the INT. (1) throw it away out of bounds (high and away)
(2) throw it away into the turf (low and away) (3) change his sight line by rolling further out of the pocket (4) pull it down and run it.

The risk (INT) was not worth the reward (a 10 yard complete on 3rd down and 15). This was poor game management on Brooks part. It was a bad read, a bad throw, and a bad decision.

DAX - Speaking of M O M E N T U M, I'm sure you realize that there is a HUGE difference from going up 17-7 vice giving SD a short field to knot the score at 14.

4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You are not wrong. the Brooks pick was a big reason for the loss. And for the 2nd week in a row.

It makes we wonder all over again why Brooks, who probably won't be on the team next yr, is even playing.

Every game Walter doesn't play, is another lost chance for him to improve.

4:50 PM  
Blogger RaiderRealist said...

The Charger game is history and we are now 2-9. The Raiders have some decisions to make. At 2-9, our season is over except for playing spoiler with the Bengals, Chiefs, Jets, and possibly the Rams. The Texans are done.

Like him or not, Aaron Brooks gives us the best chance to win. Do we keep starting Brooks, start Brooks and bring Walter in for relief in the second half, or just plain start Walter and get as much of a look at him as possible before next year's draft? I think its critical to the future of this team to see if he really is our QB of the future or we need to go a different route. What say you Men of Silver and Black?

6:04 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Dan - I agree with most of your points. I don't mean to knit-pick but calling the tipped ball a 50/50 chance for a 1st down is wrong for 2 simple reasons.

(1) The Raider WR was well short of the 1st down marker. It was 3rd down and 15 and I would guestimate that it would have been a 10 yard gain at best IF completed.

(2) The Raider WR wasn't open. It is very hard to complete a pass if your WR isn't open.

I would put the odds as follows;

- 10% chance of completing the pass
- 1% chance of gaining a 1st down
- 91.6% chance of SeaBass converting a 42 yard FG if Brooks throws the ball away.

Which odds do you like?

7:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dax, yes, I understand MOMENTUM, of course. The call was a killer. But did we do everything IN OUR POWER to win the game? No. If you don't believe me, listen to Chris Carr:

"If we would have never allowed that guy to catch the ball, we would have never been in that position," defensive back Chris Carr said. "You've got to look at yourself and say when it comes down to it, you want to win a game by what you do on the field and not on a penalty or not on a call."

I agree, the call hurts, but it hurts because we're just not good enough to evercome that stuff right now. The most insulting part is listening to the NFL spin it as "the correct call"...

5:43 AM  
Blogger nyraider said...

Dan: Haven't we learned not to draft o-linemen in the first round? We desparately need to draft a skill position in the first round, e.g., RB (Peterson) or QB (Quinn) O-linemen will come later in the draft and through FA.

5:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are a couple of issues that I would like to address:
Did anyone notice how we ended up in that 3rd and 15. Before the interception. The Raiders were in a 2 reciever 1 TE set. It may have been a 2 reciever and 2 TE set. Either way, during the play 3 players ran routes. We were on around the 20 or 25 yard line. All 3 players ran directly to the endzone. Leaving no one underneath to throw to. Result no one was open, and Brooks was sacked.
Two things here:
Brooks should have gotten rid of the ball. To avoid the sack.
Second the play call was a terrible play call and was a complete waste of a down.
People want to blame Brooks for the loss, well fine but give him credit for the other 14 points we put up. The offense hasnt changed and niether has the play calling. Brooks is improvising, his mobility is saving him. With that in mind we still gave up 5 sacks. He could have easily been sacked an additional 3-5 times.
This brings me to Walter. Yes I know the season is over. It was over 4 weeks ago. I really dont know about Walter. When he has had time he hasnt been accurate with his throws. He also doesnt make very good decisions. Yes game time could help with those things. The only concern I have is look at the situation that he comes into. Putting him in now you run the risk of serious injury, and destroying any of his confidence. Lets face it he has looked absolutly horrible while he played. Im just not sure putting him in now would actually benifit him any. While we are looking torward the future, the team especialy the defense are looking at each game. If you dont put in the person that gives you the best chance of winning. Then how can you expect the defense to continue to provide maximum effort. They are trying everything they can do to win. Putting in Walter is like saying we dont care if we win or lose offensivly.

As for the fumble .... pass...whatever it was didnt happen with 30 seconds left and they kicked the winning field goal. All that score did was allow them to tie the game. Just like the tuck rule...there was still enough game to play. Yeah it broke some hearts. But if he hadnt made the bone head play of spinning the ball then they still would have gotten the 1st down. Its not the reason we lost the game. It affected the game but its not the reason. What about Brayton getting blown up on the off tackle play that Tomilson scored on. What about the missed tackle by Schwiegart on the same play. How about the Long run by Tomilson. Or his half back pass that they run on us every time they play us and damn near every time they play period. How about the offense not doing a damn thing after the middle of the 3rd qtr.

While I was watching the game I could just hear Marty telling his guys dont worry its the Raiders they will make the mistakes at the end and give the game back to us,
And that is what we did.

1:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey folks - i was checking out the sports headlines in the newspaper stands in hawaii. took long enough. now all we need to do is GET RID OD ART SHELL and his pretend o-line coaches.

shell has proven as he did in the past that he does not know how to handle personnel. with his double standards ie: moss/porter vs. walter and his unending support for his pal walsh, he's lost the team.

let's go ahead and hire shoop or ryan as head coach for the long haul. since no one else is DUMB enough to take this job anyfreakinway. this little nostalgic reunion will never work.

i'm with glenn dickey on this one. what a sad, sad state this organization has become. oh and by the way - i am a paying season ticket holder so i can say any damn thing i wanna say most especially when it comes to al f-ing davis.
he ultimately is the reason for our downfall. it's back to LA in 2010 folks. mark my words!

4:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home