[cad]

The defense the Raiders boast this upcoming season has alot of promise and players to look forward to however the complaints made about Rob Ryan's scheme will be just (Stu may of had a point)

Raider fans can boast how good this secondary will be but there is nothing more annoying then players not for filling their amazing potential

How many people here would say the Raiders have the better secondary then the Buccaneers and Colts? and be honest

based on talent the Raiders win with three talented young corner backs plus two versatile safetys one who locks down tight ends and should be much more effective at his natural FS spot and a SS who is a sure tackler and on the verge of being a very well respected safety

so by process of position evaluation you would have to go with the raiders correct? right now i would choose the Bucs and Colts for a few reasons

Tanard Jackson may be the most overlooked player in the NFL, he is huge for the cover 2 success , Barber old sure but for this year still a dynamite zone CB, there rookie already in trouble still has talent no question, but really it isnt about their players its about the Raiders head coaches father Monte Kiffin
Colts have better safety's (Bethea is very underrated Sanders probowler) in their scheme and their scheme and player personal are a perfect match

The Colts had best Pass defense overall and then the Bucs both deploying a cover 2 ( rumor had it Lane wanted it, but Al kept Ryan) and both got at least 28 sacks or more (we had 27, NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR MAN TO MAN)

The Colts lost Freeney and Sanders for chunks of the year but still managed to get 28 sacks and dominate this category why? scheme scheme scheme, personally i like the cover 2 alot eliminates the big play

(Colts and Bucs allowed 20 and 24 plays 20+ yards)

The Raiders allowed 46

The Raiders on average allowed 7.6 yards per completion,the colts and bucs allowed 5.9 and 6.0 and also were throw to over 50 times more

and in hindsight did we improve anything? i mean Ryan promised some "tweaking" but it is still concerning how vanilla this system is especially when the Raiders havent got at least three effective speed rushers to give Ryan some breathing room , to make the Raiders system work their must be better then adequate pressure so the man-man coverage works, the corners we have are good, great actually but with out blitzing and pressure from the outside they can only play so well

i think the Raiders talent will creep them to at least the top 12 in pass defense but with this unit plus some pass rushers ,there is no reason why they shouldnt crack top 3, if not then Ryan isnt blitzing enough and not doing his job which is to make this one of the best pass defenses in the NFL. and i just dont feel that with Ryan that will happen especially if the run defense doesnt get out of the bottom 20 ( made some improvements, but not enough!)

run defense we had the worst average 4.8 YARDS PER RUN!, tied for most rushing TDs allowed 18! 2nd worst in yardage (really worst because Dolphins were ran on much more and only allowed 122 more yards on 58 more attempts
we have a Sands who MIGHT play better (family tragedy real reason?) Sapp is addition by subtraction but Kelly wont dominate in run defense, Richarson is an improvement but still unproven and a Grady Jackson would be ideal but not a savior, this has to be Ryans last shot because with another scheme this defense could be a very good one ( Al Davis's scheme will likely not change but we did experiment with the 3-4 so its possible but unlikley) , both are dependent on each other and if the run defense isnt improved then similar results will show the Raiders need fire and attitude , even fundamentals such as tackling was an issue
thoughts?

[R8RDeathstroke]

i thinks it's obvious by now that our defense is broken and hasn't been fixed in years. whether or not it's Al's fault for demanding a man to man will never be truly known until we try something different......something that unfortunately doesn't seem to be in the cards.

[XZ.]

Good Arguement.
I know you know that.
But at the end of the day, i've given up on defensive philosophies. Only one matters, and that is Al Davis'.
THat being said, my only hope is for us to score points, and just pray the other qb f*cks up.

I'm not even hoping for the defense to help us to win a game, under Ryan.

[R8RDeathstroke]

It's just annoying as hell EVERY time our defense allows 1st downs with a run straight through the middle. I know no defense is perfect, but c'mon! It happens all too often IMHO.

[Anotharaiderfan]

New scheme?

[cad]

Originally Posted by Anotharaiderfan

New scheme?

then like i said it will probably hold us back until we change (we actually have before)

or

if Ryan gives this defense new looks

[Wormwood]

Originally Posted by cad

run defense we had the worst average 4.8 YARDS PER RUN!, tied for most rushing TDs allowed 18! 2nd worst in yardage (really worst because Dolphins were ran on much more and only allowed 122 more yards on 58 more attempts
we have a Sands who MIGHT play better (family tradegy real reason?) Sapp is addition by subtraction but Kelly wont dominate in run defense, Richarson is an improvement but still unproven and a Grady Jackson would be ideal but not a savior, this has to be Ryans last shot because with another scheme this defense could be a very good one
thoughts?

Some valid points you bring up. We'll never run a Tampa-2 while Al is in charge so might as well get that out of the way. I really think it was time for Ryan to leave after last season. Guys been here for four years and our defense has consistently been ranked at the bottom of the NFL., especially our run defense. While I don't think we have the best defensive personnel in the league, particularly with our front four, I don't think this bland, unimaginative, scheme he runs does our players any favors.

[cad]

Originally Posted by Wormwood

Some valid points you bring up. We'll never run a Tampa-2 while Al is in charge so might as well get that out of the way. I really think it was time for Ryan to leave after last season. Guys been here for four years and our defense has consistently been ranked at the bottom of the NFL., especially our run defense. While I don't think we have the best defensive personnel in the league, particularly with our front four, I don't think this bland, unimaginative, scheme he runs does our players any favors.

good point, the front four needs depth and improvement , i never thought we will get a new scheme i said we need one thats all and i will have no one arguing there but seeing that its Al's scheme would Ryan's departure be really necessary?, if he was to be fired then obviously a new guy would implement some new packages but be limited like they all are

[Wormwood]

I think if Kiff can get this offense untracked this year and we manage to win some games, I think he'll be in a much better position to lobby for a new DC. I just have a hard time believing that Al is solely responsible for calling all the defensive shots.

[speedkills]

I kind of disagree here you tend to forget at this time last yera Ryan was god and everyone was raving about the defense not only moving into top 5 in yards allowed but in points allowed too, get some half decent play up front and yes this defense can move in to the top half of the league

[Pietro]

Al's philosphy on offense and defense has not changed. Why should it?

The idea is score more than the other guy when it's over.

How you do it dosn't matter.

For the most part, he want's to see attacking offense and attacking defense.

Throw long, run for tough yardage.

Corners that play man to man and attack the quarterback.

Problem is, he has not had the talent he has had in the past.

It's not so much the schemes as it is talent to go with it.

One player has made it to the pro bowl each year for who knows how long.

When the Raiders were in their hey day, it was not unusual to see 5-8 players and one year they had 11, 8 on offense.

It was easy to play defense when Alzado and Long were rushing the passer.

When you had Hayes and Haynes playing corner, it was easy to play man to man.

We have Burgess on one end and...........There is part of the problem.

In the pro bowl at linebacker there was Ted Hendricks, Villapiano.

Another time, Hendricks, Millen, Rod Martin.

This time................

That position is improving with Morrison and Howard and they may yet see the pro bowl but they aren't there yet.

The problem with Stu was there wasn't enough talent around him to cover his weaknesses.

He was often the last line of defense and failing at inopportune times.

As bad as the defensive stats were that you cited, the team was in most games last year.

That said, it is reasonable to assume you generate more offense, score more points and you change the complexion of the game. Maybe, to your advantage.

I can't think of many games we were nursing multiple score leads.

The team is now stockpiling talent. As that talent matures and the team gels into a team, wins will happen.

I think sooner than later.

[oldschool]

THIS IS THE BEST POST EVER ON ANOTHER BLOG ABOUT OUR OFFENSE! WHY LANE GETS THE FREE PASS WHO KNOWS?????????????????????
by Rick
about 8 hours ago Good post. I can see some are still swilling around in their collective throats about the defense and in particular the DT position. The bases of that concern probably comes from last years performance. The bottom line is wins! We lost 7 games last year that had NOTHING to do with the defense.

Detroit L-21-36, Note we did not score in the first half. Three turnovers by us (offense) late led to 17 points for Det. 5 Turnovers total!

At Denver L- 20-23 TIME OUT by the rat! We only scored three points in the first half.

Kansas City L 10-12 AGAIN we are shut out in the first half!!!!!!!!!

At Tennessee L 9-13, we were Shut out in the second half.

Texans L- 17-24, AGAIN, AGAIN we are shut out in the first half.

Bears L- 6-17, Just two field goals by Sea Bass?

Colts L 14-21, Inept offense and turnovers hurt our chances.

With any kind of offense we win all the above games. But even if we win only 4 that would have left us at 8-8 With the improvements this year on offense and the easier schedule I agree we can be 9-7. So I think the post is smart, smart, smart,!!!!

Raidermadness

[Pietro]

Originally Posted by oldschool

THIS IS THE BEST POST EVER ON ANOTHER BLOG ABOUT OUR OFFENSE! WHY LANE GETS THE FREE PASS WHO KNOWS?????????????????????
by Rick
about 8 hours ago Good post. I can see some are still swilling around in their collective throats about the defense and in particular the DT position. The bases of that concern probably comes from last years performance. The bottom line is wins! We lost 7 games last year that had NOTHING to do with the defense.

Detroit L-21-36, Note we did not score in the first half. Three turnovers by us (offense) late led to 17 points for Det. 5 Turnovers total!

At Denver L- 20-23 TIME OUT by the rat! We only scored three points in the first half.

Kansas City L 10-12 AGAIN we are shut out in the first half!!!!!!!!!

At Tennessee L 9-13, we were Shut out in the second half.

Texans L- 17-24, AGAIN, AGAIN we are shut out in the first half.

Bears L- 6-17, Just two field goals by Sea Bass?

Colts L 14-21, Inept offense and turnovers hurt our chances.

With any kind of offense we win all the above games. But even if we win only 4 that would have left us at 8-8 With the improvements this year on offense and the easier schedule I agree we can be 9-7. So I think the post is smart, smart, smart,!!!!

Raidermadness

Exactly my point.

You listed 7 games and if you want to include the first Charger game that was within one touchdown for most of the game and the Raiders had a chance to pull even that's 8 games the Raiders could have won.

They did win 4 and that's 12.

Winning teams win most of those games.

With the improvements this team has made and with the anticipated maturity and ultimate gelling as a unit this team can be vastly improved next year.

BTW, don't forget our very favorable schedule.

A lot expect 8-8 to be a good year and even 9-7.

For me, anything less than 10-6 with that schedule is a disappointment.

My basis. See above.

And, most important. These are the Raiders.

Our tradition is winning games and championships.

Winning is as much attitude as it is talent. The best team dosn't always win.

See my posts on the winning 10 SB thread.

You have to have talent of course, but with talent comes preparation, committment, work ethic, attitude, effort and sometimes luck.

Talent and luck and luck you can't do much about.

You can do one heck go a long ways to improve your talent and luck by doing the other things listed above.

That's the job of Davis and the coaches.

It starts at the top and nobody knows more about winning than Al Davis.

Lane Kiffin needs to understand that and quit trying to fight Davis to show whose boss or that he needs more power and authority.

You win as a team and it starts with understanding the chain of command and authority.

When Kiffin realizes this he will be more effective. The team will be better too.

[530Feak]

The problem with Stu was that he sucked. Sucked from day 1. The calibur of atheletes has dramatically improved on D. Granted the D line could still use some upgrading, but you have to realize that to be competitive YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE HORSES TO RUN THE RACE. With a better secondary, that will stay with their man longer, it gives the line that much longer of a chance to get to the qb.

[Mykle VanHausen]

Originally Posted by cad

The defense the Raiders boast this upcoming season has alot of promise and players to look forward to however the complaints made about Rob Ryan's scheme will be just (Stu may of had a point)


My theory involving Ryan's scheme has the Raiders offense ditching 06' to get JaMarcus Russell. Ryan's defense ditching 07' to get Mcfadden. Throw in the instalation of the ZBS, sprinkle in a hundred mill or so to FA's and viola' we're back in the hunt just as our rivals are headed into the tank. If I'm correct we may never know "Sometimes when you do something right, no one will ever know.", BUT, if Ryan's defense suddenly comes to life again in 08'...

Raider fans can boast how good this secondary will be but there is nothing more annoying then players not for filling their amazing potential

How many people here would say the Raiders have the better secondary then the Buccaneers and Colts? and be honest


Kind of apples and oranges. As you go on to mention, Tampa uses the cover 2 and Oakland, as Stu mentioned, the Cover -O which he was ill equiped for. I look for him to have a better time in Washington.

based on talent the Raiders win with three talented young corner backs plus two versatile safetys one who locks down tight ends and should be much more effective at his natural FS spot and a SS who is a sure tackler and on the verge of being a very well respected safety

so by process of position evaluation you would have to go with the raiders correct? right now i would choose the Bucs and Colts for a few reasons

Yes.

The raiders run a defense that (in theory) allows them to go man coverage at any time. Not easy for DBs or backers. calls for a lot of accountability on individuals which is I think what your hitting at about scheme. Cover 2 is thoeretically easier for DB's to run (Hence Philip Buccanons success after leaving Oakland for Tampa Bay, but if Ryan can pull it off, it makes Oaklands defense extra work for O coordinators who can fairly cookie cut against teams that run more standard D's.

Tanard Jackson may be the most overlooked player in the NFL, he is huge for the cover 2 success , Barber old sure but for this year still a dynamite zone CB, there rookie already in trouble still has talent no question, but really it isnt about their players its about the Raiders head coaches father Monte Kiffin
Colts have better safety's (Bethea is very underrated Sanders probowler) in their scheme and their scheme and player personal are a perfect match

Sanders plays like he's 10 ft. tall. Unfortunately, like you metntion, he gets hurt alot.

The Colts had best Pass defense overall and then the Bucs both deploying a cover 2 ( rumor had it Lane wanted it, but Al kept Ryan) and both got at least 28 sacks or more (we had 27, NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR MAN TO MAN)

"Not good enough!" Agreed. But we had Fabian washington, Burgess with a boo boo, Sapp dropping 900 lbs, Tommy Kelly's blown knee, Gerard Warren injured, Sands no show and no one to rush the passer from the right.
Blitzes MAY have helped,but with cover guys like Morrison and Thomas, you almost have to side with Ryan takin' his chances in coverage.


The Colts lost Freeney and Sanders for chunks of the year but still managed to get 28 sacks and dominate this category why? scheme scheme scheme, personally i like the cover 2 alot eliminates the big play

I seriously wonder if Ryan kept it simple because he had little choice? Lot of young guys and very different approach...Like Stu said, "Most teams employ the Cover-O as a gimmick, not a base."

Getting another year under their belt could be beneficial.

(Colts and Bucs allowed 20 and 24 plays 20+ yards)

The Raiders allowed 46

Yup. 46. Ryan spoke specifically to this, claiming "Oakland's run defense wasn't bad. Its the long plays" that kill them. Bye bye Stu. Hello leading tackler at Safety in the league, Gibril Wilson of the Super Bowl Champion NY Giants. Big difference? We'll find out...

The Raiders on average allowed 7.6 yards per completion,the colts and bucs allowed 5.9 and 6.0 and also were throw to over 50 times more

Wonder how many of those were screens and passes to the backs?

and in hindsight did we improve anything? i mean Ryan promised some "tweaking" but it is still concerning how vanilla this system is especially when the Raiders havent got at least three effective speed rushers to give Ryan some breathing room , to make the Raiders system work their must be better then adequate pressure so the man-man coverage works, the corners we have are good, great actually but with out blitzing and pressure from the outside they can only play so well

Have to stay healthier on the line this year, but the guys are there...

i think the Raiders talent will creep them to at least the top 12 in pass defense but with this unit plus some pass rushers ,there is no reason why they shouldnt crack top 3, if not then Ryan isnt blitzing enough and not doing his job which is to make this one of the best pass defenses in the NFL. and i just dont feel that with Ryan that will happen especially if the run defense doesnt get out of the bottom 20 ( made some improvements, but not enough!)

run defense we had the worst average 4.8 YARDS PER RUN!, tied for most rushing TDs allowed 18! 2nd worst in yardage (really worst because Dolphins were ran on much more and only allowed 122 more yards on 58 more attempts
we have a Sands who MIGHT play better (family tragedy real reason?) Sapp is addition by subtraction but Kelly wont dominate in run defense, Richarson is an improvement but still unproven and a Grady Jackson would be ideal but not a savior, this has to be Ryans last shot because with another scheme this defense could be a very good one ( Al Davis's scheme will likely not change but we did experiment with the 3-4 so its possible but unlikley) , both are dependent on each other and if the run defense isnt improved then similar results will show the Raiders need fire and attitude , even fundamentals such as tackling was an issue
thoughts?

If long shot Ed Hartwell can have a jeremy Newberry like miracle resurrection, Oaklands run D could get a whole lot better with a quickness. Again, a long shot though.

In my mind poor tackling is alomst entirely the COACHES FAULT. Lack of discipline and poor fundamentals cannot be tolerated! Hope this improves in 08'.