Raider News and Notes

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:09 am

- Lane Kiffin has done a SUPER job since taking over as HC, however, if Culpepper does not get the start v. Cleveland I will sling my first dose of criticism his way. I understand the idea of firmly establishing the entire offensive system -- and MsCown's 'success' in that regard, but QB was our most glaring weak link on Sunday. 33 net yds passing, 3 picks, 2 fumbles?? Seriously now.

- Denver did a good job of removing Curry from the game, forcing McCown to look elsewhere. The Raiders don't currently have quite enough speed at WR. The hope is that Higgins can emerge as that speed guy we need, so I hope they gradually get the kid on the field more so we can see if he can find his way to help us in the future.

- Robert Gallery and Michael Huff are back on my Christmas Card list. Stroke of genious by Kiffin to let Gallery settle in at LG. Dare I say, R. Gallery is doing a borderline GREAT job at LG?? Still had the obligatory bonehead IP penalty, but the guy is agile, and he's moving folks out of the way to open running lanes. Also does a NICE jog pulling. Genius.
M. Huff did a GREAT job in run support. I give him props. S. Schwieg, on the other hand, was embarassing. Soft is an understatement. It's easy to see why D. Darius was brought in. Offseason priority -- safety.

- Kiffin said in training camp that offensive line would be a strength of this team, and I chuckled. His words, however, are starting to ring true. I haven't seen a Raider line abuse a Denver defensive front in the running game like what happened on Sunday in quite some time. This team is going to keep running the ball well, IMO. LaMont is doing the job, but it'll be good to get Rhodes back in week 5 to help carry the load. LaMont tends to look a little gassed after 2 or 3 straight carries.

- The defensive front is not doing the job getting heat on the QB. Sapp, Burgess, etc ... need to step it up. The secondary is getting hung out to dry, and they're being made to look less capable than they are.

- Oakland's linebackers are doing a helluva job. They still have a tendency to overpursue, but they are active and they are making plays.

- Janikowski. No excuse. You simply have to make the 2nd kick. I knew it was game over as soon as the T.O. was granted to Denver. Knew Jano would gag on the 2nd attempt, and I knew the momentum swing would allow Denver to take it down the field for the game winner ..... and that J. Elam would NOT miss.

- Mr Casual Fan will look at the Raiders' 0-2 record and think, "same ol' Raiders," but it's not accurate. They're on their way to respectability, on the way to notching wins, on the way to bigger things. Lane Kiffin had a deep hole to get this mess of a team out of, and I'm seeing definite progress. Baby steps.

- This Sunday v. Cleveland is a MUST win game.

- Do the right thing, Kiff.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:07 pm

Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way a Raider fan.

Not sure when they changed the rule to allow the sidelines to call timeouts but I think it sucks. Only people that should be allowed to call timeouts are the 22 guys on the field. Total bullshit to have the offense line up with the defense across from then showing no inclination to take a timeout, then blowing the whistle when the ball is snapped, because the coach whispers to the Head Linesman, “Hey, we’ll take a timeout now”.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:16 pm

Couldn't agree more Goobs. Icing the kicker like that is bush league.

joe6pac · Post by **joe6pac** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:46 pm

It's obvious that teams will be able to run rough shod on Denver this year if Lamont Jordan (servicable at best) can run for one fity on'em.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:17 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way a Raider fan.

Not sure when they changed the rule to allow the sidelines to call timeouts but I think it sucks. Only people that should be allowed to call timeouts are the 22 guys on the field. Total bullshit to have the offense line up with the defense across from then showing no inclination to take a timeout, then blowing the whistle when the ball is snapped, because the coach whispers to the Head Linesman, “Hey, we’ll take a timeout now”.

So you lost $5. Tough shit. If you can't afford to lose, don't fucking bet.

Console yourself in the fact tht BSmack lost twice as much as you did.

Flawed Logic · Post by **Flawed Logic** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:24 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way a Raider fan.

Not sure when they changed the rule to allow the sidelines to call timeouts but I think it sucks. Only people that should be allowed to call timeouts are the 22 guys on the field. Total bullshit to have the offense line up with the defense across from then showing no inclination to take a timeout, then blowing the whistle when the ball is snapped, because the coach whispers to the Head Linesman, “Hey, we’ll take a timeout now”.

Rack that. Total bullshit.

Nice takes, Pop. Solid all the way around.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:42 pm

Cuda wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way a Raider fan.

Not sure when they changed the rule to allow the sidelines to call timeouts but I think it sucks. Only people that should be allowed to call timeouts are the 22 guys on the field. Total bullshit to have the offense line up with the defense across from then showing no inclination to take a timeout, then blowing the whistle when the ball is snapped, because the coach whispers to the Head Linesman, “Hey, we’ll take a timeout now”.
So you lost $5.

No, I won $10, because either way, Oakland covered. Moron.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:02 pm

If you won so much as a dime, you'd have a priapism instead of bitching about how you won it

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:52 pm

Cuda wrote:Console yourself in the fact tht BSmack lost twice as much as you did.

BSmack took the Broncos flat in a pick-em challenge. BSmack is only 2 games off the season lead. BSmack is poised to steamroll once they start playing through the bye weeks and real handicapping skill is required.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:12 pm

BSmack is a fucking retard too

Al Swearengen · Post by **Al Swearengen** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:16 pm

Same old Raiders, and same Karma vs the Donks too.. Who knew icing the kicker would work? uhhhh everybody watching the game did. It's a shame the only one on that team with any brains is Buddy's son. I hope they let him get away and continue being the Oakland Laughing Stocks we all know and love!

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:18 pm

Cuda wrote:

If you won so much as a dime, you'd have a priapism instead of bitching about how you won it

Cooter,

You’re the one that claimed that I lost $5. The only way to have lost was to have bet Denver to cover. Which they didn’t. Why would I then bitch about Oakland not getting that field goal? Try to follow along, you fucking retard.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:41 pm

joe6pac wrote:It's obvious that teams will be able to run rough shod on Denver this year if Lamont Jordan (servicable at best) can run for one fity on'em.

Wait and see what happens when he faces your turd-awful Chiefs.

Happy Days are Here Again!!!

orcinus · Post by **orcinus** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:48 am

Those waiting for the Daunte Culpepper era to begin in Oakland will have to wait a little longer. Head coach Lane Kiffin told the media on Monday that Josh McCown, who threw three interceptions to the Broncos Sunday, will be the starter again this week.

Wow ... why even sign the guy if you're going to keep him stuck behind McClown the human INT machine?

Almost makes you wonder if something happened that cheesed off Alcula.

Ponderous.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:54 am

:idea:

Genius Kiffin ...... training the offensive to handle adversity.
What doesn't kill them will only make them stronger.

yep

joe6pac · Post by **joe6pac** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:37 pm

poptart wrote:
joe6pac wrote:It's obvious that teams will be able to run rough shod on Denver this year if Lamont Jordan (servicable at best) can run for one fity on'em.
Wait and see what happens when he faces your turd-awful Chiefs.

Happy Days are Here Again!!!

Ahem!

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:24 am

Yeah, that hurts.
When will I not hurt again??

KC's defense did a nice job.
They did pretty much what SD did to Oakland the week previous.
They loaded up with bodies near the line of scrimmage.
It's gonna be tough to find running room for anyone when that's the case.
The Raiders showed an inability to go to a 'plan B'.
No medium-to-deep passing game.

Running the ball is the strength of Oakland's offense.
But absent the threat that you can hurt a defense passing, the run will struggle.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:32 am

I was hoping to see Culpepper take off running like he did against the Phish, of which you 'duhfans were so proud.

Guess that wasn't part of the game plan.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:25 am

Goober McTuber wrote:
No, I won $10, because either way, Oakland covered. Moron.

KC was a -3 dog - How do you figure Oakland covered?

drummer · Post by **drummer** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:04 am

Goober McTuber wrote:Let me preface this by saying that I am in no way a Raider fan.

Not sure when they changed the rule to allow the sidelines to call timeouts but I think it sucks. Only people that should be allowed to call timeouts are the 22 guys on the field. Total bullshit to have the offense line up with the defense across from then showing no inclination to take a timeout, then blowing the whistle when the ball is snapped, because the coach whispers to the Head Linesman, “Hey, we’ll take a timeout now”.

Tomlin did the same 'pulling the chair' move on the K, against Shanny, and ever since Shanny did it, it has become a staple.

RACK Shanny.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:11 am

KC Scott wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:
No, I won $10, because either way, Oakland covered. Moron.
KC was a -3 dog - How do you figure Oakland covered?

Scott - Goobs wasn't talking about the KC game.

Hello?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:21 am

War Wagon wrote:I was hoping to see Culpepper take off running like he did against the Phish, of which you 'duhfans were so proud.

Guess that wasn't part of the game plan.

I was disappointed in Herm's classless move of trying to run up the score on Oakland by kicking the third FG.

A 6 pt lead on Oakland is plenty enough.