Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 46

Thread: Sick of the "we cant develop a QB" Talk

  1. #16
    RaiderFunk's Avatar
    RaiderFunk is offline
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    So. Cal
    Posts
    9,636
    the next time we do it will be the second guy. Well...let me say this...we may know how to develop one..but we only have actually developed ONE...Ken Stabler...every other raider QB has been a disgraced or underperforming free agent.

    Before you challenge the Raider Fans to sell out the Colisseum or say the locals don't support the team Please Read Raider187's extremely informative post: http://www.raiderfans.net/forum/oakl...ance-woes.html

  2. #17
    HITMAN's Avatar
    HITMAN is offline
    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mount Sinai
    Posts
    36,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    Im sick of the we cant develop a QB talk..

    I think that is bs!

    If Al drafts a QB who has A SOLID work ethic rather than drafting intangibles I don't see how we cant develop one??

    It takes good coaching and WORK ethic to develop... not some FATASS money chasing freak who could throw a balll from his ass..

    This isnt a anti jamarcus thread, but im just saying AL needs to draft a rolando mcClain type qb where he is a complete football junkie and works hard to get better
    Okay, in the Raiders 50 year history, exactly how many QB's has this organization developed? meaning drafted, brought up through the organization and saw that QB have success?

    If my memory serves me correctly, it has only developed one and that was 40 years ago.

    If you read Jerry Mac's comments they are valid and also accurate. The Raiders as an organization could do it, but have failed to do it since Stabler for a number of reasons, impatience, lack of stability at head coach lead the list.
    "You can't Appoint, Hire, or Declare Leadership" ~ Sonny Barger

    "Al Davis thought all owners were dilettantes with a new toy. He said to me many times through the years that owners are often the problem with their franchises, that too many of them think they can run things when they cannot, and the teams that succeed are the ones where the owner hires the best people he can and turns the game over to them."

  3. #18
    HorrorSCope's Avatar
    HorrorSCope is offline
    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    19,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    Im sick of the we cant develop a QB talk..

    I think that is bs!
    Just think how sick we are that "we can't develop a QB!". Sick and freakin tired! Don't point this way, point towards the teams way.

  4. #19
    Okie's Avatar
    Okie is offline Limited Membership
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    7,730
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    Im sick of the we cant develop a QB talk..

    I think that is bs!

    If Al drafts a QB who has A SOLID work ethic rather than drafting intangibles I don't see how we cant develop one??

    It takes good coaching and WORK ethic to develop... not some FATASS money chasing freak who could throw a balll from his ass..

    This isnt a anti jamarcus thread, but im just saying AL needs to draft a rolando mcClain type qb where he is a complete football junkie and works hard to get better
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raiderwerewolf View Post
    HUH, lots Bs ASSUMPTIONS on Jerry macs Blog right there. Was he there? How does he know what guidance he was and not given?

    As for the online reciever, argument, all top picks start on bad teams, troy aikman was 1-15 his first year, that in no way excuses such regression when a career backup and comes in with the same team and out plays you ten fold.
    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.

  5. #20
    Jacoby Ford's Avatar
    Jacoby Ford is offline
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by HITMAN View Post
    Okay, in the Raiders 50 year history, exactly how many QB's has this organization developed? meaning drafted, brought up through the organization and saw that QB have success?

    If my memory serves me correctly, it has only developed one and that was 40 years ago.

    If you read Jerry Mac's comments they are valid and also accurate. The Raiders as an organization could do it, but have failed to do it since Stabler for a number of reasons, impatience, lack of stability at head coach lead the list.
    First of all I agree 100 percent that we only developed one...but how many times has al drafted the intangible freak rather than the hard working I want to get better qb??

    A qb who gets drafted has to put in work to get better the manning brothers are so driven to win and they put in the work to get better even though they are on top of the league!

  6. #21
    Willmark's Avatar
    Willmark is offline Limited Membership
    Pro Bowler
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    832
    Quote Originally Posted by blackbishop View Post
    There is a reason grads could not stay on the field. I will let you think about it for a bit.

    And as to the receivers? Schilens did not play til russell was benched. Murphy and DHB come on. Watkins?

    Also, grads had ONE QUARTER of decent play otherwise he was decidedly mediocre.
    I'll take Grad's mediocre (which I disagree with) over Jabustus Off-the-Markus craptacular "play" any day of the week, twice on Sunday.

  7. #22
    R8RFOX's Avatar
    R8RFOX is offline

    2006, 2014
    Raiderfans.net
    Site Sponsor

    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Beaverton, OR
    Posts
    14,070
    Quote Originally Posted by blackbishop View Post
    Russell never had a chance - Inside the Oakland Raiders - A look inside the world of the highly classified Oakland Raiders from the writers of Bay Area News Group

    Ill add a couple of more. Please disagree if you want.

    No oline
    No running game
    hurt or crappy receivers
    no run defense
    JMac's opinion regarding Russell is complete BS
    Don't let what you can't do, stop you from doing what you can do!

  8. #23
    R8RFOX's Avatar
    R8RFOX is offline

    2006, 2014
    Raiderfans.net
    Site Sponsor

    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Beaverton, OR
    Posts
    14,070
    Quote Originally Posted by HITMAN View Post
    Okay, in the Raiders 50 year history, exactly how many QB's has this organization developed? meaning drafted, brought up through the organization and saw that QB have success?

    If my memory serves me correctly, it has only developed one and that was 40 years ago.

    If you read Jerry Mac's comments they are valid and also accurate. The Raiders as an organization could do it, but have failed to do it since Stabler for a number of reasons, impatience, lack of stability at head coach lead the list.
    I agree to a point. The Raiders did everything in their power to give JR a chance and he failed. No effort = No production = a short NFL career no matter where you play.
    Don't let what you can't do, stop you from doing what you can do!

  9. #24
    kidkotch's Avatar
    kidkotch is offline Limited Membership
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    255
    Proof is in the pudding. Up until now, the Raiders are absolutely unable to develop a QB. If you disagree, show us the evidence of all the QB's they've developed over the past 20 years. Maybe this will all change with the different thinking that seems to be taking place ie. developing a line, good offensive coordinating, getting worthy receivers, developing a running game etc.

    That said, Russell's biggest issue was his lack of effort...period. It showed when the team sagged when he came in last year. They gave up because they knew he put in ZERO effort. Granted he wasn't given much, but had he shown some initiative, the team would have played better around him like they did for Grads.

    Russell's demise was ultimately his own fault, but the Raiders still can't develop young QB's.

  10. #25
    madstork's Avatar
    madstork is offline

    2009
    Raiderfans.net
    Member Sponsor

    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Okie View Post
    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.
    I've disagreed with you on most of your pro-Russell posts even though I'm not a Russell "hater"; I wanted this kid to succeed in the worst way.

    I have to point out though, that after 25 games, it was clear to most of his teammates, coaches, front office people, the owner, and even fans, that Russell wasn't putting in an earnest effort to succeed because he didn't really care if he succeeded. That's why you pull the plug on Russell after 25 games and that's why you don't pull the plug on Campbell or Aikman after 25 games IMO...
    "He's relentless, shoot him in the head is the only way to stop him. If Howie's alive and still kicking he's coming."

    -HOF guard John Hannah

  11. #26
    HITMAN's Avatar
    HITMAN is offline
    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mount Sinai
    Posts
    36,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    First of all I agree 100 percent that we only developed one...but how many times has al drafted the intangible freak rather than the hard working I want to get better qb??

    A qb who gets drafted has to put in work to get better the manning brothers are so driven to win and they put in the work to get better even though they are on top of the league!
    But it still supports the idea that the Raiders can't develop a QB. The organization lacks stability and patience and that is Davis' doing. While I'm not going to lay all the blame on Russell for being a failure, there were other QB's who were good players that failed with the Raiders too and not because they were lazy and indifferent.

    Since Shell I look at the number of coaches that have gone through the doors at Alameda. You can't develop a player when you change coaches like you change socks... it will never work, and when you have a lazy unmotivated player like Russell it's certainly going to fail and fail miserably.
    "You can't Appoint, Hire, or Declare Leadership" ~ Sonny Barger

    "Al Davis thought all owners were dilettantes with a new toy. He said to me many times through the years that owners are often the problem with their franchises, that too many of them think they can run things when they cannot, and the teams that succeed are the ones where the owner hires the best people he can and turns the game over to them."

  12. #27
    Jacoby Ford's Avatar
    Jacoby Ford is offline
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by HITMAN View Post
    But it still supports the idea that the Raiders can't develop a QB. The organization lacks stability and patience and that is Davis' doing. While I'm not going to lay all the blame on Russell for being a failure, there were other QB's who were good players that failed with the Raiders too and not because they were lazy and indifferent.

    Since Shell I look at the number of coaches that have gone through the doors at Alameda. You can't develop a player when you change coaches like you change socks... it will never work, and when you have a lazy unmotivated player like Russell it's certainly going to fail and fail miserably.
    That's definitely a respectable argument! Don't get me wrong, I believe this program needs stability! I believe it needs a gm! But i dont blame the raiders organization for not being able to develop QB's I just think they draft horrible when it comes to qbs minus stabler obviously!

    Marinovich?? Had so many personal problems and drug problems...Marinovich was taken ahead of brett favre.. So many teams passed on farve so its not like raiders were only one..But brett favre had a determination an a will to win...

    Jamarcus russell our latest first round qb taken... Was a question mark when he was drafted had one good season at lsu.. And was drafted only based off potential and intangibles didnt have any drive or determination...In fact his biggest accomplishment and goal was to get the biggest diamond on his chain...

    Next qb we draft I want to see al draft a college winning qb played all four years did good all years and has a drive and will to win! Not someone whose goal was to get rich..

    THEN ILL SEE IF THEY CAN DEVOLOP QBS

  13. #28
    Okie's Avatar
    Okie is offline Limited Membership
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    7,730
    Quote Originally Posted by madstork View Post
    I've disagreed with you on most of your pro-Russell posts even though I'm not a Russell "hater"; I wanted this kid to succeed in the worst way.

    I have to point out though, that after 25 games, it was clear to most of his teammates, coaches, front office people, the owner, and even fans, that Russell wasn't putting in an earnest effort to succeed because he didn't really care if he succeeded. That's why you pull the plug on Russell after 25 games and that's why you don't pull the plug on Campbell or Aikman after 25 games IMO...
    Oh, dont get me wrong and im sorry if my rambling wasnt clear. I agree, with his lack of effort and commitment to the job he should be cut. Im just saying that his lack of production isnt uncommon with QBs of his experience and that shouldnt be the basis.

  14. #29
    Raiderwerewolf is offline Banned
    Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Zero Gravity
    Posts
    1,861
    Quote Originally Posted by Okie View Post
    Oh, dont get me wrong and im sorry if my rambling wasnt clear. I agree, with his lack of effort and commitment to the job he should be cut. Im just saying that his lack of production isnt uncommon with QBs of his experience and that shouldnt be the basis.
    HUH, again spinning it as Russell was not that bad, it IS very UNCOMMON for a top pick in their third year to be as bad and unproductive as Russell was. Only a few QB's have ever had as low production into their third year as Russell. Russells season was the worst for a Qb in over a decade.

  15. #30
    HITMAN's Avatar
    HITMAN is offline
    Chairman of the Board
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Mount Sinai
    Posts
    36,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Moss View Post
    That's definitely a respectable argument! Don't get me wrong, I believe this program needs stability! I believe it needs a gm! But i dont blame the raiders organization for not being able to develop QB's I just think they draft horrible when it comes to qbs minus stabler obviously!

    Marinovich?? Had so many personal problems and drug problems...Marinovich was taken ahead of brett favre.. So many teams passed on farve so its not like raiders were only one..But brett favre had a determination an a will to win...

    Jamarcus russell our latest first round qb taken... Was a question mark when he was drafted had one good season at lsu.. And was drafted only based off potential and intangibles didnt have any drive or determination...In fact his biggest accomplishment and goal was to get the biggest diamond on his chain...

    Next qb we draft I want to see al draft a college winning qb played all four years did good all years and has a drive and will to win! Not someone whose goal was to get rich..

    THEN ILL SEE IF THEY CAN DEVOLOP QBS
    I doubt the Raiders will draft a QB in the first round the remainder of Davis' tenure. Marinovich, like Russell was touted as the savior of the franchise and Marinovich, like Russell was too immature to handle the responsibility and Marinovich's dependency on drugs didn't help his cause.
    "You can't Appoint, Hire, or Declare Leadership" ~ Sonny Barger

    "Al Davis thought all owners were dilettantes with a new toy. He said to me many times through the years that owners are often the problem with their franchises, that too many of them think they can run things when they cannot, and the teams that succeed are the ones where the owner hires the best people he can and turns the game over to them."

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •