Where the Oakland Raiders Stand: Offense

Thoughts from the Dark Side

March 23, 2008

35 Comments

Recommended (0) | Share

The Oakland Raiders have made a series of moves in their offense this season, retaining Cornell Green and Justin Fargas, as well as adding Kwame Harris, Javon Walker, Drew Carter. Barry Sims, Jerry Porter, and Josh McCown are gone. After all of these moves, where does the offense stand? What remains to be added to get ready for the coming season? Here is a position by position break down of where the Raiders' offense stands as of now.

Quarterback:

On the roster: JaMarcus Russell and Andrew Walter.

Farewell: Daunte Culpepper and Josh McCown

Outlook:�� JaMarcus Russell will be given every opportuinty to show that he can take the reigns and start from day one. He is the future of the franchise and the long term prospects of the Raiders rest on his right arm. Andrew Walter is a capable back-up, but still may be shell shocked from the beating he took in 2006.

Moves: The Raiders will likely add a third quarterback, likely a veteran mentor. Look for it to possibly be a return of Daunte Culpepper if he doesn't get any offers to start.

Running Back:

On the Roster: Justin Fargas, Michael Bush, Adimchinobe Echemandu, Dominic Rhodes, and LaMont Jordan

Farewell: None as of yet

Outlook: The Raiders had the sixth best rushing attack in the NFL last year, and the addition of Michael Bush could improve on that. Look for LaMont Jordan to be cut or traded, as he has been a disappointment in his time in Oakland. That move will free up about 4 million in salary cap room. Fargas will be the starter as he is coming off of a 1000 yard season, despite only being a featured back in 9 games. Rhodes and Bush will split carries as a change of pace back. I don't expect any additions here, and feel that Darren McFadden, while he will likely be a good back is not the move that would be best for the Raiders at this time.

Moves: Expect to see LaMont Jordan gone. Other than that, the Raiders are well set in this position.

Fullback:

On the Roster: Justin Griffith and Oren O'Neal

Farewell: None

Outlook: I look for another productive year from that complementary tandem. Griffith is the better of the two as a receiver and runner, while O'Neal is proving to be a better road grater to open lanes for the Raiders' halfbacks.

Moves: I don't see any.

Tight End:

On the Roster: Zach Miller, John Madsen, Fred Wakefield, and Tony Stewart

Farewell: None as yet

Outlook: Zach Miller had a great rookie year, really coming on towards the end of the season. It looks like he is already building a rapport with Russell, which is something that other teams should be fearing. John Madsen has shown flashes as a receiving tight end, but has not been the best at blocking. Wakefield and Stewart play mostly on special teams.

Moves: Wakefield and Stewart may end up being pushed by camp fodder, but after TE being a big focus last offseason don't look for too many moves here.

Wide Receiver:

On the roster: Ronald Curry, Javon Walker, Drew Carter, Johnnie Lee Higgins, Todd Watkins, Will Buchanon, Chris McFoy, Jonathan Holland, and Drisan James

Farewell: Tim Dwight, and good riddance to Jerry Porter.

Outlook: This was the weakest link last season, and the Raiders addressed it in a big way acquiring Walker and Carter in free agency. There was also the addition by subtraction of Porter. The trio of Curry, Walker, and Carter will be the primary targets. Higgins and Watkins will fight it out for the fourth slot. The others will likely have to have a strang camp to stick around.

Moves: The Raiders have already made a huge splash in this area. They may take a prospect with a late round pick.

Offensive Tackle:

On the Roster: Kwame Harris, Paul McQuistan, Cornell Green, Mario Henderson, Seth Wand, Mark Wilson, and Jonathan Palmer

Farewell: Barry Sims

Outlook: YIKES! Paul McQuistan looked to be improving and would do well at right tackle, but out of the remaining names, there is not one that fills me with confidence in protecting Russell's blind side. Kwame Harris is said to have potential, but was a bust in SF. Tom Cable engineered an amazing turnaround on the Raiders' line last year, but can he do that for Harris? Mario Henderson, after being acquired with a pick that the Raiders gave up a third rounder this year to acquire didn't impress anyone on the staff enough to get any field time last season. Green was serviceable at right tackle, but was a penalty machine that wasn't missed once McQuistan took over. The other guys have been kicking around the practice squad.

Moves: Consider drafting Jake Long if he is on the board. Maybe pray that Harris can turn it around. The left tackle position as it stands scares the hell out of me, and is likely raising Russell's life insurance rates. For that matter, Barry Sims is still out there.

Offensive Guard:

On the Roster: Robert Gallery, Cooper Carlisle

Farewell: None

Outlook: Robert Gallery found a home at the left guard position, and will likely get even better finally getting a second consecutive season at the same position in the same system. Cooper Carlisle turned out to be a really good guard for the Raiders. Look for them to continue.

Moves: Not likely. Expect some of the names from the rogues gallery of tackles to slide inside as depth.

Center:

On the Roster: Jake Grove, Chris Morris, Jesse Boone

Farewell: None

Outlook: Jeremy Newberry has not been re-signed as of this writing. Look for the Raiders to make a move there as he was solid at center, despite some problems with his shotgun snapping. Jake Grove filled in admirably during Newberry's injuries. The question becomes whether Grove can win his job back in training camp. Morris and Boone are depth who can slide out to guard.

Moves: Look for Newberry to be re-signed.

Tags: NFL, Oakland Raiders, Raiders

Discussion

35 Comments on "Where the Oakland Raiders Stand: Offense"

Posted by Where the Raiders Stand: Offense - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board - Where the Raider Nation l, March 23, 2008 1:49 AM

[...] the Raiders Stand: Offense Thoughts from the Dark Side | MVN - Most Valuable Network � Blog Archive � Where the Oakland Raiders... __________________ "While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a [...]

Posted by muse, March 23, 2008 6:17 AM

Ive heard that Mark Wilson and Jonathan Palmer are pushing hard for the left tackle position and Harris will play RT if he can beat out McQuistan...........Jesse Boone and Seth Wand are both strong tuff players,if they can imprvoe their technique in camp,one of them could surprise...Tom Cable is a great coach,you dont need to be an elite athlete,to get success from his system...

Posted by Mad Road Dog, March 23, 2008 6:38 AM

I have been watching the Raiders since they were first televised and always took for the granted the strong "O" line that the Raiders fielded. It was always "football 101" that a great "O" line protected the QB, moved the chains, scored and in so doing, kept the defense off the field and rested.

The "Greatness of the Raiders" ended in the era that ensued after the 1983 Superbowl because Al Davis failed to maintain the talent pool on the "O" line. It wasn't until the likes of Steve Wienewski and Barret Robbins and Lincoln Kennedy came aboard that the Raiders returned to the Superbowl.

The fact is a winning organization starts with a great "O" line, it makes or breaks every other position. The Raider's losing record of of the last five years has been is directly due to the lack of talent on the "O" line which continues till today. The ZBS has improved the run game but does little for the passing game if you do not have the talent. Harris, Henderson and the rest of the present "O" line are not worthy to hold the jockstraps of the past Raider greats. Until Al Davis gets a clue, the Raiders are waisting their money and their time getting back to the playoffs.

harping that the has forgotten the importance of having a quality "O" line and with not only need a LT but the best in the business

Posted by In Al we Trust, March 23, 2008 7:12 AM

With Cables cut block system he can make an average o-lineman look and play good. I dont see us using our 4 th for J Long.

I have flip-flopped on us drafting either DMAC or D-Line more time than Hillary on who & what she supports and finally and strongly feel this way. Ok no I havent

We are still re-tooling, as everyone will agree. Last year we finished 4-12 and have the 4th pick in the draft.

With the 4th pick we must take DMAC if available. He is an ELITE PROSPECT. I'll repeat that-----He is an ELITE PROSPECT.

I feel that our Raiders will go at least 7-9, 8-8 this year. Which means next years pick will be in the 14 to 16 slots.

We can take a d-lineman next year with a mid first. DMAC's of the world don��t fall to 15th

We may not see a top 10 pick for 10 years.

There are more DT/DE floating around the NFL than LT��s, Petersons or Westbrooks. We can find one in FA, or pick one up after the June 1 cuts.

If JR and DMAC pan out to be elite players and I'm saying If For all you donk fans (hee haw) reading this, The Raiders can be a very, very, good team for the next 10 years.

Posted by Raiderdave, March 23, 2008 7:19 AM

Our needs are at left Tackle and Jake Long is our Boy,this is what we need so Jamarcus has somebody covering his backside.Jake Long is a Stud and can come in and play right now and would make the left side of the Offensive line great.

Posted by paul, March 23, 2008 7:27 AM

As of now...Today...Easter Sunday the RAIDERS must trade out of the 4th slot in the first round with THE DALLAS COWBOYS. We must get 2 Later 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick. We must package that 3rd round pick with FABIAN WASHINGTON and trade into the 1st round again. THAT WOULD GIVE THE RAIDERS 3 FIRST ROUND PICKS TO ADD OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE LINEMEN. AND THE RAIDERS must release L.JORDAN. He has no trade value and is a big hit against the cap.

Posted by This guy writes some good stuff - Oakland Raiders Forum, March 23, 2008 7:58 AM

[...] This guy writes some good stuff Thoughts from the Dark Side | MVN - Most Valuable Network � Blog Archive � Where the Oakland Raiders... [...]

Posted by ed nelson, March 23, 2008 8:08 AM

This guy sucks and he's a racist. Fuck him bitch How about good riddens to Drayton, Gallery, Sweighert, Sims also

Posted by Where the Oakland Raiders Stand: Offense - Oakland Raiders Forum | Message Board - Where the Raider, March 23, 2008 8:08 AM

[...] the Oakland Raiders Stand: Offense Thoughts from the Dark Side | MVN - Most Valuable Network � Blog Archive � Where the Oakland Raiders... __________________ KIFFIN [...]

#10

Posted by Maloso Omar, March 23, 2008 9:18 AM

I hope those guys in the front office and those so called talent scouts read your articles as we do. I've been a Raiders fan for 29 years and I've experienced alot of hi's and most recently alot of lows. The offensive line has suffered since that year after they played the Bills in that AFC championship game in the early 90's. I believe with the exception of of our most recent championship years our offense line has been bad at best. Just ask Hoss., he endured alot of those bad early years. The Raiders played a game against the Dolphins and Brian Cox just kept sacking Hoss and after one sack Hoss got up and picked up the ball and chucked it at the back of the helmet of one of our offensive lineman, who just left him on the ground and didn't have the courtesey to help him up. When they returned to Oakland in '95 things just seemed to get worst, it's as if they forgot what Raiders football was all about.

I truly hope that those guys read articles like yours and remind them of how things once were. You know something that strikes me as odd, in quoting De Angelo Hall, that having so many Raiders Hall of Famers around,that those guys dont tap in to the fount of information and get this thing back to its rightful place in football. Sometimes letting go of the ego and surrendering the idea that they know everything might be the new attitude that is needed in order to win.(surrender doesn't mean quitting, it just means joining the winning side) And those old Hall of Famers are proven winners.

I dont understand how Gallery continues to miss the snap count, how he continues to get holding calls when the play has gone the other way away from him, just plain stupid mistakes. I had a very interesting conversation last year with John Vella last year and he expressed that without a doubt ,that if he or any of his teammates would have had more than one holding or false start call they would have been gone. That there was a sense within that offensive line that they were accountable to the team and each other. John Madden would in an indirect way single them out during practice and the feeling of letting his teammates down was unbarable, God forbid that they allowed a sack against Kenny Stabler.

Maybe somehow these guys can let their egos get out of the way and re-learn how to play the game and bring us back to Glory. Thanks for all your hard work.

#11

Posted by Al's well that ends well, March 23, 2008 9:39 AM

OL,RB or DL ? A case can be made for each. The DL club says " D wins championships" But if you look at the last ten years (Could go back 20 but no need to here). You find that the teams that win it all are more known for their offenses. With the exception of Baltimore in '01.

Ya, There was TB over Oakland but IMO that was more to do with their coach knowing our team better than our coach did. And what about the Giants in the most recent SB? It took some last minute offensive heroics to pull that one out.

Den, StL, NE, Ind and even Pitt (not to mention Dal & GB before them) had great D's , But were more known for their potent offenses. For good reason. ( not just because it was more glamorus)

Common denominator? QB who reads D's and can pick apart opposition, coupled w/ decent run game to keep D's guessing. and receiving corps that get the job done.

A good D' is important, very important, But I'm not sure it's the modern championship formula.

#12

Posted by TeamRADRZ, March 23, 2008 10:09 AM

I believe the key to winning championships looking back the last ten years or so is not Offense and not Defense, it is a balanced team. You even said it yourself the winning teams had solid Defense with a potent offense. That is the key to winning consistantly. because with that formula no matter what happens in a game bad calls, turnovers or mistakes which everside of the team is on the field at the end of the game can win it for you. We had a few games wear the O did enough to win but the D let us down or the opposite wear the d played great but the O couldn't score on the final drive. So I say FU to all these writers saying Raiders are headed for a train wreck or they are bottom feeders or whatever negative journalism they have used against us. We are on the right track and we have a good chance depending on injuries to possibly win the division 8 to 10 wins is possible!!! SO GO RAIDERS!!!!!!

#13

Posted by Thoughts from the Dark Side: Where the Oakland Raiders Stand: Offense | The RaiderCast, March 23, 2008 10:37 AM

[...] Read more. Posted in Blog, Oakland Raiders | [...]

#14

Posted by Al's well that ends well, March 23, 2008 10:41 AM

I agree TEAM'

Balance. and a QB who can read defenses at the line. GO RAIDERS!

#15

Posted by RaiderKen, March 23, 2008 10:47 AM

I believe that you must have a great Defense. With a good (above average) Offense. To win you have to score points, but only 1 point more than your opponent. Defense holds on for the win, creates turnovers, and intimidates and demoralizes teams. Yes teams not just Offenses, but the other defense, thier coaches, and on the road silences the crowd. At home nothing gets me more pumped than a three and out or a turnover in our end. Yes you have to have an offense, but Defense wins championships period.

#16

Posted by Al's well that ends well, March 23, 2008 11:18 AM

I believe a good D is a must, However, I just don't see it as the formula for championships as it was in the past.

It seems the more recent formula is, Good Defense, Great offense.

The Giants were more equally balanced, and TB and Baltimore have been considered the only real D' teams to get the Lombardi in 25 or 30 years.

Maybe it has to do with many of the rule changes that are meant to allowed for more offense ( thus more so called exciting games)

I do believe the old saying " if they don't score, they can't win" But when I look at the majority of recent SB winners, I see great Offense, good Defense

just an observation.

#17

Posted by Al's well that ends well, March 23, 2008 11:29 AM

OK , maybe 25 to 30 years is too far back to go

#18

Posted by Panty Raider, March 23, 2008 11:54 AM

If "D" wins period than why did the "Sqeelers" get knocked off when they had the #1 "D"..."Pits" was also the #3 Rushing "O"....

Hell....The "Patsy" Cheatsters were the #4 "D" above the "Midget"s at #7....And had the #1 "O" against the "Dwarf"s who were at #16...

So much for all those stupid slogans that the "Mediot"s pump out and some of you gullible fans swallow every year....Evaluate something based on match-ups instead of "Slogans" and you might be right for once....

Note that the top 5 Rushing "O"s were play-off teams except Minn at #1....And the #4 Rush won the "SB"....The Raiders were at #6.....Take "Run DMc" and get the rushing title and a chance at the play-offs.....

PantyRaider....Just-Win-Baby!!!!

#19

Posted by Patrick Patterson, March 23, 2008 1:02 PM

Ed Nelson,

Thank you for your insightful comment.

The reason that Porter got the good riddance is because of his cancerous attitude.

As far as accusing me of being racist, because I am happy that an underachieving malcontent is now another team's problem, all I can as is that you don't know me and have no idea.

#20

Posted by Double standard, March 23, 2008 1:49 PM

I didn't read one word about race, it was a total colorblind report. Keep it real, stop looking for apples in a orange tree.

#21

Posted by Scott, March 23, 2008 1:49 PM

The Raiders need to draft a dominant player, period.

Mcfadden is clearly more explosive than any RB on the roster.

Jake Long appears to be more dominant than any Tackle on the roster.

The remaining available players may fit our scheme or they may be a missing piece, but we need a guy that may have a pro bowl opportunity year one.

#22

Posted by SeattleRaider, March 23, 2008 2:10 PM

I think we have had a great draft already..

2nd round Probowl CB ready to start.

3rd round OL with one year of experience.( should be ready to go season opener)

So, no matter what we do...4th pick, trade down..we've done well on day one.

#23

Posted by OakFoSho, March 23, 2008 2:12 PM

Ed Nelson,

Patrick = Racist? What? Why?

You can't just throw out claims like that with out any evidence whatsoever. In fact, if Patrick's picture was not up on the blog, I would not know if he were white, black, brown, or yellow. Patrick's race as nothing to do with not liking Porter. Porter, on the other hand, has everything to do with most of Raider Nation not liking Porter. Remember the "my shirt is off and I'm trying to be like TO" moment before the 2006 season, and all the shit he talked about Art Shell, before they had even met? Thats why people dislike JP, along with the fact that his play could never catch up to his mouth, and it has nothing to do with racism.

Al's Mandate is McFadden!

OakFoSho

#24

Posted by Obama's past, March 23, 2008 3:31 PM

I think we found out more about how Ed Nelson's mind works, than Patrick's

#25

Posted by Snoopy, March 23, 2008 4:26 PM

Mad Road Dog, You sound knowledgable and like someone who really knows his stuff but dude... Your whining son and it doesn't become ya...

It is what it is and you liking it or not is a waste of time because Al will do what ever Al will do, PERIOD! So just sit back and hope it all works. I think the ol man is doing the best that can possibly be expected considering what's out there...

And just in case you weren't looking, We played in the Superbowl in 2002. Save for us playing against the guy who's system GOT US THERE... We would have won that game so I can appreciate the frustration but whinning is for 49'r fans.

We are The RAIDER NATION Baby.. And nobody is like us!

#26

Posted by LDizzle, March 23, 2008 4:39 PM

Al's well that ends well:

You must be like 10 years old if you think that offense is the key over defense. So Baltimore is the only team in the last 20 years that has won primarily on defense? What about Pittsburgh 3 years ago? GIANTS LAST YEAR, Colts had the best offense in the league for all those years that they were knocked out of the playoffs and when they won it two years ago it was because of their defense, Patriots had the best offense in the league last year and what happened? the Giants DEFENSE stopped them and they stopped the Cowboys before that in the playoffs. So stop saying that offense wins championships silly little boy because it is so obviously not the case.

Ed Nelson is clearly the racist here. He only mentioned white players he wanted to get rid of. What a bigot. "If it doesn't fit you must aquit" right Ed?

#27

Posted by LDizzle, March 23, 2008 4:42 PM

In fact the last team I can remember that won the superbowl with primarily offense was the Rams (I am not counting any superbowls with the Cheatriots because they don't count. And if I did I would point out that they beat the Rams with their DEFENSE *and cheating*)

#28

Posted by OakFoSho, March 23, 2008 6:59 PM

LDizzle,

And it can be argued that D played a huge role, if not the decisive role in the Rams SB win. There D was pretty good, and the ending, a tackle on the one yard line, stopped the Titans and ended the game. Still one of the greatest SB endings of all time. So even when considering the Rams, this guys argument really hold no weight.

Al's Mandate is McFadden!

OakFoSho

#29

Posted by Al's well that ends well, March 23, 2008 7:04 PM

Read it again Dizzle, I said those teams had good defenses. Just better offenses. How many SBs Has Chicago won? You don't count NE teams? How about Tampa with their great years of D'. It was a miracle catch that won it for NY this year, or NE would have another ring. Ya the D's kept the games close, but the offenses got them there, and won them.

#30

Posted by Panty Raider, March 23, 2008 7:23 PM

�Ķ.The ��Patsy�� Cheatsters were the #4 ��D�� above the ��Midget��s at #7�Ķ.And had the #1 ��O�� against the ��Dwarf��s who were at #16�Ķ

Note that the top 5 Rushing ��O��s were play-off teams except Minn at #1�Ķ.And the #4 Rush won the ��SB��Ķ.The Raiders were at #6�Ķ..Take ��Run DMc�� and get the rushing title and a chance at the play-offs�Ķ..

PantyRaider...."D"-vs-"O"....Just Run Baby!!!!

#31

Posted by nilbymouth, March 23, 2008 9:42 PM

I think you have it pretty much bang on. I still think Difler could be a good pickup to act as a mentor for us (3rd string behind Walter - believe he could still be value if Russel doesn't pan out)

#32

Posted by LDizzle, March 24, 2008 10:40 AM

I just read an article called "Raiders silence is deafening" and I think it makes a good deal of sense. I started reading it thinking "oh here we go, another sports writer trying desperately to stir up controversy based on speculation" but as I kept reading it really made quite a bit of sense and renews my worries that despite all of the offseason moves, we may be doomed by the rift of Kiffin and AD. Here is the article link:

http://www.insidebayarea.com/sports/ci_8676553

#33

Posted by Aaronraider13, March 25, 2008 12:07 AM

Ldizzle,

The article you speak of is another garbage rewrite of the same nonsense BSPN could not prove. The imaginary rift between kiffin and Al. Monte Poole has been taking cheap shots at the Raiders for years. He is the most unproffesional hack this side of Nancy gay. And to all of you people that think the Raiders need to waste the number 4 pick on mcfadden get a clue. We need him as much as we need Mat Ryan. We need him as much as we need a corner. Get a grip. We are set at Running back! Enough with the Mcfadden nonsense. Jake Long, Chris long, or Trade back with the cowboys for their 2 number 1s and a defensive end.

#34

Posted by Patrick Patterson, March 25, 2008 12:32 AM

Tyler-

The Niners have hope?

Aaron-

I would have to rate Lowell Cohn as a much bigger unprofessional hack than Poole.

#35

Posted by Aaronraider13, March 25, 2008 11:55 AM

Mad road dog,

Wisnewski retired the year before the Raiders went to the superbowl. He would not have been pushed around by sapp and mcfarland like mo collins was.