
Originally Posted by
Okie
Its not just the QBs, we are horrible at developing any talent. Well except kickers and thats only because the rest of the team is so bad, they end up kicking alot. How many first round talents have we had labeled as busts? You think they werent first or second round grades on most boards? They were, we are horrible at player development period, but people write it off as horrible drafting.
We are horrible at developing QBs simply because of the turnover we have. Young QBs (there are very few exceptions) for the most part need stability to develop. I dont even think we (Raiders) know that word exists. Our other biggest problem is lack of patience. We as fans are just as bad as our owner. We absolutely are not willing to wait out the amount of time it takes for these things to start showing gains.
Russell is a good example of this. First, let me say his own piss poor work ethic and mentality contributed to the situation and he is as much accountable as any aspect for his and our failures and "bust" status. But, with that said, 25 games is not enough for "most" QBs to "get it". And even if you absolutely hate Russell you cant be dumb enough to not acknowledge the fact that having 2 head coaches and 3different playcallers in that 25 games span will severly hinder any quarterbacks development. History tells you that. 40 to 50 + games is typically what you see with most QBs before huge strides are taken, we gave the kid half of that. Normally i would say it was way too soon to call the kid a bust and cut him, but his character question marks makes that decision understandable.
Funny how when its something that comes out negative about Russell you are all about believing and running with the information, regardless of the source. But when its somethign that can be interpruted as defending Russell, the guy doesnt know what hes talking about, no matter who or what his credibility is. Sorry, just find that funny around here.
Sure, we should have seen progression instead of regression, sure alot of QBs start our on bad teams and turn it around. But i will ask you to show me one that has progressed in a situation similar to Russells. 25 starts, 2 different head coaches, 3 different playcallers, WRs consisting of 3 rookies and not one legetimate #2 WR let alone a #1, poor offensive line, suspect schemes and no running game. Which one of those QBs you mentioned have been through similar situations.
Sure, Russell regressed and a large part was due to his own issues, but lets not sit here and pretend he was put into a simliar situation as Troy Aikman. A guy who was put in a bad spot, but had an organization that put him in a stable coaching environment and built a team around him. Apples and oranges man. The only thing similar between Troy and Jamarcus is their statistics through similar number of starts. I find that funny because Troy was in a much better situation, a harder worker, a guy who supposdedly "got it" but yet still didnt put up any better number then Russell did at the same points in their careers.
Actually, just from recent memory the only guy that jumps to mind in a situation similar to Russell is Campbell. Hes gone through a ton of coaching changes himself, although he did have a slightly better running game and a few veterans around him he still was in a poor situation. Will be interesting to see how he handles it here and if he regresses or progresses. And the Bruce thing, its been beat to death around here how things were completely different from his starts to Russells earlier season struggles.
The point is bud, sure Russell ****ed himself with his own piss poor approach to the job. But Jerrys point is dead on, in that very same situation i cannot think of many QBs who would have had much success if any in that same situation.
Bookmarks