As the shield turns: Not enough talent on the Oakland Raiders?

Thoughts from the Dark Side

August 11, 2008

As the shield turns: Not enough talent on the Oakland Raiders?

31 Comments

Recommended (0) | Share

Do the Raiders need more depth?

"It�s just been a situation that unfortunately we haven�t brought guys in.� I can control what I can control, come out here every day and get our guys as good as we can. I�m pleased with the top of our roster, but we need to add to the bottom of our roster. We need more competition." - Lane Kiffin

What does that mean?� Just when we thought that things had died down, the business of winning was underway, and everyone in the Raiders organization was feeling 'happy,' we now find out that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing and apparently vice-versa.

This isn't good news if it's true.� Remember, they didn't have a need for a running back on draft day either.� They also liked Culpepper, thought he did a really good job last season.� That's why he's not on any team right now.� Remember how there were no plans to trade Randy Moss, or release Lamont Jordan?� I do, and so with this latest quote, I try to remind myself that what is said isn't normally the reality.

Even though I try to remind myself of all of the misdirection that the young Coach Kiffin has done in the past, he was still pretty honest about the rift between he and Mr. Davis...or was he?� See?� You can't really tell.� In so many ways, it would be easy to see how Kiffin and Davis would have trouble co-existing, because Mr. Davis was on the money when he said that Kiffin reminded him of himself.� Those that don't get along well are often just too much alike.

All that says is that Kiffin is doing one of two things: 1) He's playing the misdirection (humble) role so that nobody gets wind that the Raiders are pretty good this year, or 2) He's sending a message to the old man that he needs better talent or a couple of injuries will sink this season and probably his Raiders coaching career.

Now, before some of you decide to go ballistic in the comment box with the, "Why you hatin'?"� I'm not, but I am trying to assess the situation, as well as analyze it.� In order to do that, objectively, I have to ask and answer the possibilities stemming from the original question, "What did he mean by that?"

To be honest with you, I don't know, but I could see how there must be some frustration right now.� I did mention in my game recap that the Raiders need help in the secondary.� While Raider Nation has been salivating at the opportunity to see Nnamdi Asomugha and DeAngelo Hall teaming up with Michael Huff and Gibril Wilson, they've forgotten at times that only Stanford Routt has shown that he can cover another receiver at an NFL level.

While Raider Nation has been more than upset about the dearth of quality run stuffers on the defensive line, good pass protectors on the offensive line, and a strong side linebacker to go with the law firm, have they forgotten that the Raiders could use upgrades in the depth department elsewhere?

Without drinking any Kool-Aid, let's assume that the Raiders still have those problems that everyone has been worried about all offseason.� Besides the fact that the Raiders are basically starting a rookie at the most important position, QB, they still look alright.

The backfield is more than set, the interior line is also probably more a strength than weakness, the receivers are merely average right now (possibly better), the secondary set (but very thin), and four of the front seven are set (WLB, MLB, RDE, LDE).

The only thing that can be done is to wait and see.� It's difficult to fathom that Kiffin wouldn't have a say in who is on the roster, but Kiffin has certainly given the impression that he's not hiring or firing players.� According to reports, he didn't know that Wesley was getting cut.� According to the comment above, he probably didn't know that Archuleta was coming in as a linebacker either...or did he?

Other quotes of the day

"I love the matchup of a very physical team, not a team that tries to trick you.� They come right at you so I'm really glad. It's the perfect opponent that we can have right now." - Lane Kiffin when asked about the match up with the Titans this Friday.

"It's been in the back of my mind for a while. I enjoy playing in the box and that's what gets me jazzed so I decided I was going to try to make a run at linebacker." - Adam Archuleta when asked about being a linebacker for the Raiders - a position he played in college at Arizona State.

"He's a great guy with talent, a good nose for the ball, he brings a lot to the game. I'm excited to have him here.� He can cover tight ends, play defense, play the run, so I'm excited to have him." - Robert Thomas on former and now current teammate, Adam Archuleta (possibly before he knew that he'd be competing with him for a job).

"We don�t just want a three and out, we want to get the ball back for the offense, the more opportunities we have to get the ball back, the better chance we have to win." - Isaiah Ekejiuba on getting turnovers on defense.

"Even though we weren�t live, he came up and hit the guy almost as live as you could. Most guys right there you tell them to stay up, but our team needs to feel that. For a corner to go up inside a C gap, fit inside like that on a goal line and make a hit, I�m not going to slow that up." - Lane Kiffin about DeAngelo Hall playing in a goal line situation with a cast on his sprained hand.

Just hanging on to the ball here at TFDS

Tags: NFL, Oakland Raiders, Raiders

Discussion

31 Comments on "As the shield turns: Not enough talent on the Oakland Raiders?"

Posted by eks, August 12, 2008 12:19 AM

Bush looks good.

Posted by Rob Calonge, August 12, 2008 12:28 AM

Bill - Absolutely right about the vanilla offense. There were several things about what the Raiders did in the first game that I was happy to see. On offense, they stayed with bread and butter, in your mouth, type of plays. Nothing fancy. I liked the fact that on 4th and 1 at the 5 yard line they went for it and got the work they need in short yardage.

On defense, I liked that the defensive front seemed to continuously change. Kelly on the right, wait! He's on the left, Burgess on the weak side, Richardson on the strong. First down and there's a linebacker blitz. Hopefully, that happens more.

Posted by Patrick Patterson, August 12, 2008 2:47 AM

Some good points there, bro.

Posted by NateDawgSnB, August 12, 2008 3:54 AM

Davis needs to choke on a apple and pass the team on to someone that realizes the coach probaly knows more than his 70+ year old A**

Posted by Thoughts from the Dark Side: As the shield turns: Not enough talent on the Oakland Raiders? | The Ra, August 12, 2008 5:19 AM

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

Posted by teofilo dimaano, August 12, 2008 5:34 AM

we should go out there and play our hearts out!!.. the other teams should be fearing us instead of us fearing them!!.. lets not second guess ourselves.... we got this!!!!

Posted by teofilo dimaano, August 12, 2008 5:40 AM

my point is and the fact is.. that this year we know we have a better team?? if we can play to the level like we were last year.. with all cylinders running... we can achieve wins... second guessing ourselve will only result in choking like we always do in the 4th?? take the ball and go forward with the damn thing!!! enough already.... im not saying that its gon be easy ... but why spend all that money and not try??

Posted by Coach Elkins, August 12, 2008 6:49 AM

Rob, is this article for real, or are you attempting to bait us into a discussion? I�ll bite, and then spit your bait back in your face. Judging by the thread you�re at least open to the possibility of agreeing with me.

Regarding any comments Mr. Davis may have made regarding similarities the two possess, he must have been referring the fact that their both married and breath oxygen. Surely he wasn't referring to their records as head coaches of the Raider's in their first season as the coach. Must have been someting else? Any attempts to instill some sort of confidence in his �negative minded� coach would have to be his motive. I mean he treats his QB with the kind of fear one has letting their daughter go out on their 1st date.

Regarding your comments at Kiffin playing a �misdirection role� as you so eloquently put it seem comical to me, as Kiffin�s idea of misdirection is showing his QB, who is in desperate need of playing experience, the direction of the bench on the sideline. I mean, I know our QB has more passes in the NFL than Arron Rogers, but 5 passes is a friggin joke. I mean, I know I�m not alone on this, but it sure woulda been nice to let the kid play a little. It�s like having a 60 million dollar toy and letting the retarded kid have control of the remote. Lane must be making these decisions? He said he didn�t care about the outcome of the game and then demonstrated the exact opposite gameplan, continually running the football. I�m sorry, but isn�t the idea behind pre-season to work on your deficiencies, and not your strengths? I guess not.

Secondly, you said he may be sending a message to Davis that if a couple injuries happen then the ship will sink. If Kiffin were a good coach, he would never question the talent of his team, rather, he should be pointing the finger at himself. This is setting an example that might have an effect which could result in a positive outcome. If the coach took responsibility it might just create players who would do the same.

Regarding his comment about the 49ers trying to trick him....LMOL....This kind of quote should tell you what I�ve been saying all along. If SF is tricking you Coach than we�re worse off than I imagined....

Just my take

Coach Elks

Posted by Al Davis, August 12, 2008 7:45 AM

no one in this league knows more than Mr. Davis.

#10

Posted by OregonRaider, August 12, 2008 8:27 AM

"I can control what I can control, come out here every day and get our guys as good as we can."

Personally, I'm sick of this kind of quote. If I was Al, I would be sticking my walker right up his a@#. Maybe he is being theatrical and playing a game? I hope so because that attitude pisses me off. It feeds into the media and shows no confidence what so ever. Can you imagine what his half time speach is like. "Well guys, I really can only control what I can control...bla bla bla maybe we can win."

#11

Posted by OregonRaider, August 12, 2008 8:28 AM

Good article and good quotes though Rob. I am glad you brought it up because it was bugging me all day yesterday.

#12

Posted by Raider Scott, August 12, 2008 8:36 AM

Rob - I think you bring up good points. How our team functions internally is a mystery and it has gotten more mysterious over the past 4-5 years. I have been a Raider fan since 1974 and I cannot recall a time where our team has been in more turmoil (horrific record for the last 4 years) and gives the appearance of an organization being run erratically. I believe Kiff turned the corner last year and we are on our way to a better record. Is the appearance of strife between Kiff and Davis real? If we have a sub-par year and Kiff is fired than it was probably real. If we have a good year and he still gets fired then there is now doubt it was real. I think we can only keep our fingers crossed that we can keep key guys healthy as it sure appears as though we are thin. The argument about playing JRuss more is a tough one. I think we all want him to get as many reps in a real game as possible. But the game against SF was the first time we could actually see what our offensive line could do. I am only guessing Kiff needed to see what type o f protection he could count on for JRuss before allowing him more time. If he played him more and JRuss got hurt, the media and everyone would say how stupid it was for Kiff to play him so much in a meaningless game. You don�t play him enough and people are second guessing the coach. I think he will see more time in the next two preseason games unless our protection is really suspect. But eventually we need to cut him loose and hope that we have a passing game. We all realize that JRuss is going to be handing off a lot this year and being asked to manage the game (aka not lose the game).

#13

Posted by Jamaal, August 12, 2008 8:39 AM

Hey Rob. Great article. I think you might be right in your 1st assessment. We may need more competition at the bottom of our roster but not an all out overhaul. I just think he was sayin more competition because of injuries more than not enough talent. As far as Kiff and Mr. Davis goes I think its funny. I love the way our organization is run and how mysterious we are. Why do we need to run our organization like everyone else in football. Do you really think that would stop the media from hatin on us? I say forget the media. When we start puttin wins on the board that still won't stop them from hatin. I Love how we do business and how Al has a permanent middle finger inside NFL offices. Were Outlawz always have been and always will be. Seriously I bet you Mr. Davis and Kiff our probably tossin back a couple shots of yak every night while lookin at game tape of the donkeys and how to destroy them. In closing its been alot of cases when the coach and owner didnt get along and they still won championships so Stop worryin about their relationship and start worryin about who you gonna talk shit too when we start bustin heads this season!!

Raider till I die!! Peace

#14

Posted by Dan, August 12, 2008 8:46 AM

I think Kiffin was sending a message to Al. Within the next few weeks teams will be cutting diamonds in the rough. There is a real chance to thickin your depth with people who by the end of the year may be competing for the role of starter. The league is full of people like this, not everybody comes out of college with a pedigree.

#15

Posted by Raider Blues, August 12, 2008 9:02 AM

I like it! Ok, I do believe Coach Kif needs to play the cards he's dealt but the shuffle is still occurring. Al made many move this offseason and did a generally good job with what was available but he can and should do more. I believe Coach is making that statement now and good on him. After all is said and done though it's time to get in and win 10 games this season and up from there Coach Kif!!!

#16

Posted by Rob Calonge, August 12, 2008 9:17 AM

Hey guys! Great responses so far! Like I said in the article, I really don't know which way the wind is blowing, but like Oregon Raider, the quote stuck with me. I guess we're going to have to wait and see.

I think that Al has done a good job of getting talent and I think that Kiffin has done a good job of coaching it. The only thing that seems to continue to bite at me is the question, "Is it the right talent for the right system?" Only time will tell.

Coach Elkins: "...It�s like having a 60 million dollar toy and letting the retarded kid have control of the remote..."

CLASSIC!! Now that put a smile on my face to start the day. Does that make me a bad person? :-)

#17

Posted by KUSHMAN, August 12, 2008 10:15 AM

good take rob.. yea only time will tell.. i love how everyone is judging russell right now because of 5 attempts that werent even close to his normal way of executing plays... he'll do good against the titans and shut everyone up. as for kiffen.. he hasn't proved anything in my eyes yet.. so its hard to make an accurate judgement on him. people need to shut up until the season starts.. your whole "where the wind blows" is where we're at so yea... but good stuff rob keep em comin!

#18

Posted by Bill, August 12, 2008 11:05 AM

While watching the game I was lovin some of our O formations. Trips left and tight, the 9ers were lost when we went into this formation. I can't wait to see us run out of this formation. I'm more then happy to have kiffin as our coach and Al as our owner/GM. Did anyone notice how vanilla we played? D-Mac up the middle time and time again. There was a lack of counters and traps. I also like the fact that our passing game worked when Kiffin was calling his offence. I can't wait to see Russell get some of the play calls Walter got. After all is said and done I think we all will like our offence. I'm still worried about our pass protection, but the roll outs and boot legs will help that out alot.

#19

Posted by Bill, August 12, 2008 11:09 AM

Here is a question for Raider Nation. If Russell can't run Kiffin's passing game as good as Walter, should Walter be our starter? My vote is YES! I don't give a crap that we paid 60mil, the best player should start. So I hope to see Russell running the offence the way it should be soon.

#20

Posted by azraider37, August 12, 2008 2:14 PM

Nice article. Kiffin's right we do need better depth at pretty much every position except RB. I am not comfotable thinking about any starter getting hurt when I think about their replacement.

You said our starters were set in "4 of the front 7". You let off Tommy Kelly. I would say if anyone is garunteed to start it would be him. Maybe you think his health is a concern, but I thought he was pretty much 100%. Am I wrong?

#21

Posted by Rob Calonge, August 12, 2008 2:24 PM

azraider37 - Until the Raiders can prove to stop the run, I'm not ready to deem that either DT spot or the SLB spot are set. If they can prove to do their jobs during the season, then we can be safe saying that they are set.

#22

Posted by UK Raider, August 12, 2008 2:53 PM

I've got more concerns with our passing game than any other aspect of the team at present. Raider Scott says it for me when he says we have to let J-Russ loose at some stage or another. If the next game was in the regular season you could guarentee that the Titans would have 8 in the box often. Even with an outstanding rushing attack it's going to be difficult to move the ball consistently without a balanced attack. I could n't tell from the limited highlights I saw but maybe others can enlighten me on what amount of play action we showed first and second down. With that sort of rushing threat it's an ideal base to sucker 'em in and put it over their heads. I don't really care it's vanilla smash mouth basic stuff as long as it's effective and we can work off it.

In reply to Bills comment about should Walter start if he runs the O better than J-Russ I agree with him but it wont happen. Kiffin has already stated JR is our starter and he'll look a right muppet if he changes course so early. I didn't see the result of the poll on TFDS asking how much time Russell's given but it's a tricky situation. With such a poor recent record the future is now.

#23

Posted by Mike49er, August 12, 2008 4:28 PM

Im a homosexual.

#24

Posted by cdog, August 12, 2008 5:06 PM

Bench Russell?

You guys are insane. This isn't little league, folks -- you draft a guy #1 overall you damn well better develop him, at the expense of winning a few games early.

#25

Posted by Rebel2124, August 12, 2008 5:38 PM

JR's playing time: Everything is riding on JR. So it would appear that like successful teams such as the Chargers and Patriots (who I frickin hate) who hold out Brady and Tomlinson - Kiffin is trying to protect our number one asset. Perhaps he's waiting for the O-line to gell some more. Hmm? I wouldn't stick my johnson in a condom I didn't trust and I wouldn't stick the future of the team behind an O-line that wasn't ready. I'm with him protecting JR, but at some point I agree, he's gotta put him out there in the preseason and not hold his hand while doing it. Patience is a virtue. The O-line needs more time together.

More talent and dept: I, like Kiffin have thought we need add better dept all along. Our team is much improved but, we should've brought more guys in to compete at OL at LB at DL and at DB just like we did at WR. I would've like to have seen someone other than Tui at QB too. For all we know Kiffin might have tried to address the dept issue with Al already, but nothings yet been done by Al. Al makes those decisions. Doesn't it seem to be a reacurring theme in the NFL nowadays, if the front office won't do what needs to be done, take that shizz to the media. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't, one thing is for certain however, Kiffin is trying to make the team better and I likes that.

Kiffin, I got your f**kin back!

The Rebel

#26

Posted by Coach Elkins, August 12, 2008 6:06 PM

Following Mike49er's lead, here's some more logical statistical information....

Last season, the Raiders defense was passed on 27.4 times per game. This was 2nd to last in the league, which tells you that opposing teams were content to run the ball on our Raiders so as to stay away from Lane Kiffin's "highly explosive Offense" as he puts it. Defensively, we had only 27 sacks for the entire season. This, in relation to the worst team in the league record wise, the MIami Dolphins, who

cleverly allowed the football to be thrown 25.6 times a game and amassed 30 sacks......Miami and Oakland were passed on less than any teams in the league last season.

The Super Bowl champion Giants lead the league in sacks with 53, with teams passing 32.7 times per game on their defense.

So what's my point...Good question....listen up kiddies, class is in session....

If the strength of the Raiders Defense this season is in the secondary, wouldn't it benefit our team to throw the football more Offensively, score some points, and force teams to play into our strengths, by forcing them to pass the ball a bit more than 27 times per game?

So why will this not happen you ask? In one word,

PREDICTABILTY

Last season the Raiders passed the ball 28.2 times per game, 4th least among all 32 NFL teams. They were sacked 41 times.

It is also interesting to note that based on last years passing stats a hypothesis can be made. Kiffin has stated that he wants to protect Russell, but doesn't realize that he does this by throwing the ball even more.

Hypothesis:

Increase the number of passing attempts and the average number of sacks allowed will go down....

Some stats which will coincide with our hypothesis show that the:

Team that passed the most last season, the Saints, with a number of 40.8 passes a game were only sacked 16 times. The New England Patriots, passed 5th most in the league last season, with 36.6 passes per game, sacked only 21 times.

It goes to show that teams who take remove the fear factor when dealing with the passing game will have a better record, and have a better passer rating at the end of the season, and ultimately a better season.

The game has changed, running the football, while once very effective, has lost a bit of luster simply because teams are spreading teams out and throwing the football more than ever before. If a team is to be successful with a running game, their Defense must also be able to stop the run. Knowing this is the weakness of the Raider defense, albeit not the players fault, you can easliy see why statistically we fail to make the grade.

Any question....

Mike49er, as you were...

Coach

p.s.

Yo Kiff, I'm just warmin up!

#27

Posted by Bill, August 12, 2008 10:39 PM

Coach,

Very nicely put to gether. My hats off to ya. I've never seen someone use so much time pileing up useless stats. Steelers with a rookie QB passed the ball on average 15 times a game. How did that work you ask. THEY WON THE FLIPPIN SUPERBOWL!!!

#28

Posted by Coach Elkins, August 13, 2008 12:09 AM

Nice point, however, that Steeler defense could stop the run....

#29

Posted by UK Raider, August 13, 2008 6:09 AM

Cdog I fully accept that Russell has to be given the time to develope but are you going to continue to do that should he suck big time. How long are you giving him? Surely the whole point of pre-season is to expand his experience and find out if he can play. A paltry quarter and 7 attempts is crap. Now we're taking bets on whether he'll attempt 10 or more passes on Friday. Why the hell aren't we giving him the whole game??? Kiffin has already stated that he is our starter. If that is the case then why do we have two backups taking over later in the game? I just dont get that. If we mortgaged the farm on Russell then he needs the playing time far more than Walter or Tui. We have an ideal opportunity for Russell to face a starting NFL defence for a quarter or so then see how he does against their back-ups. We get to see how he's coming on and his education improves. I can hear your replies of 'he'll be murdered by week 1' but what's he gonna do when the opener comes around. Hide behind the sofa? He could be the highest paid hand-off monkey in league history. He has to show us something and now is the perfect time with no pressure.

I like what Kiffin has been saying so far but I'm not sure that his actions are in agreement with his words. We have complaints of more competition needed but two guys who have had a good camp and pre-season opener wont be starting on week 1. Walter he's already said is a back-up and I'll be amazed if Watkins is above Walker on the depth chart. The reason why? Money and reputation. Unfortunately neither of those two are going to win you one game. A number 1 pick doesn't guarentee you that Russell is going to be a success and you can nurture him for as long as you like.

The Raiders look likely to have a fine running game and an improving D this year. Even with mediocre pass protection I want to see lots of play-action this Friday to make the most of our main threat. Dont close the door on Walter just yet tho. Surely with competition the point is let the person who performs most consistently in the system you're using win. No matter how much you've spent on them.

#30

Posted by Raider Blues, August 13, 2008 7:15 AM

Ok Coach... WTF? Throw more so not to get sacked more? You're going to have to come correct with more stats to support your theory and stay away from the anomoly. If your goal is to eliminate sacks then run every play! Hand that ball off every play and the sacks will be nominal.

You say score points passing? Ok, spend all your picks on O Line and receivers as well as the time it takes JRuss to gel with them and you have a point. Considering that wasn't an option with what was available we took the running game with a twist approach while developing the gel recently mentioned. Score points running combined with (DMac slot homerun threat) and take away the opponent's ability to score quickly passing is a better approach to me.

4th qtr lead - no stupid 3 and out passing with weak secondary but run the clock out moving the chains with Bush, DMAC and FARGAS - Ok we're down in the 4th and we're in trouble so pick your poison. I think though with what was available we place DMAC in as an addition to the run-game w/ 2 back/ slot or whatever where we can still score quickly as an accent to the run-game while developing a passing threat.

#31

Posted by American Sports News � Even the Oakland Raider’s Most Optimistic of Fans Should Be Worried, August 14, 2008 4:03 PM

[...] injury after injury of key performers that the Raiders can’t afford to lose. The head coach has been quoted as saying that he doesn’t have enough depth and that the team isn’t very good right [...]