The Raider Dark Age of 2003-2009...What Went Wrong?? Simple Version.

**Da Swami** · 03-12-2012, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by HITMAN

Nice assesment, but I believe you've merely scratched the surface of the problems that began to put the Raiders in the position they have been in. While I would agree to some point Davis made some questionable draft choices. The real crux of the matter was Davis was still trying to run the organization at least on the football side of things as it was done prior to free agency and we see that Davis struggled as did several other teams. Davis was a creature of habit and he continued to believe you could build a winner by drafting the biggest and fastest guys, but that didn't always equate to winning. I do believe the constant change in coaches was certainly a factor in the losing. There was little or no continuity and Davis was certainly unwilling to give coaches ample time to change the culture.

Davis was hardpressed to remain status quo and in the end it hurt the franchise...

Which Coach during this tenure would have changed the culture had he been given a longer leash?

**paul0660** · 03-12-2012, 05:17 PM

SoH, that OP is better than some hacks get paid for. I think a couple things need to be highlighted. GAnnon was expected to come back in 04, so the scramble for QB's when he went down was incessant. Also, and I know I will get flack for this, the defense during most of that time was primitive and ineffective, resulting in lopsided times of possession, and no way to stop anyone else's two minute offense. Pretty sure that is on Davis.

Grove and Gallery were fine picks if Gannon had come back to stay. I don't think either of them didn't take a play off every other series. On a better team their play would have been elevated and consistent.

I think Turner is a VERY good head coach, and should have been kept on. The guys who replaced him were silly, and that might be the place in time when Al got completely ineffective. I think he was getting old, or insecure, or both. We won't ever know. Just like with Shanahan and Gruden, Al seemed to think that head coaching ability was not important. Does anyone else think that?

The real mark of the ineptness in this period? TWO division rivals got to the Championship game, and they both lost, and not barely. Both were led, btw by ex Raider head coaches. We were the doormat of a bad division, as well as being bad.

But, unless Manning ends up with the Broncos, and doesn't get hurt, we win the division, and advance. If Manning plays the whole season, it will be quite a horserace.

**HITMAN** · 03-13-2012, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by Da Swami

Which Coach during this tenure would have changed the culture had he been given a longer leash?

That's a good question, and one I don't have the answer to, but I would say most if not all of those coaches were not put in positions to succeed. It's hard to change the culture of losing when you are restricted in what you can and cannot do. I would also say that all the coaches after Gruden shouldn't have been hired in the first place. Only Turner has had marginal success after leaving the Raiders the rest haven't even been considered for other head coaching jobs, save Kiffin and Callahan at the college levels.

**BelongInOakland** · 03-15-2012, 03:05 PM

for me, these are the biggest turning points in Raiders history: Al Davis firing Mike Shanahan, Al Davis-Marcus Allen feud, beef, and Jon Gruden leaving, i would combine the Shanahan firing and Marcus Allen feud together since they were close to around the same time. Since the Raiders moved back to Oakland in 1995, they have made the playoffs only 3 times.

**LI Raider** · 03-15-2012, 03:09 PM

I would love if someone wrote a tell all book about this era. Although it was painful it would be a great read.

**regret** · 03-15-2012, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Da Swami

Which Coach during this tenure would have changed the culture had he been given a longer leash?

I think the larger problem is he was trying to run the organization as he did in the 70s and 80s despite the fact his failing health and loss of mobility no longer allowed him to watch over every little detail like a hawk. There was a time he could hold everyone accountable but once that time passed a restructuring desperately needed to take place and didn't... until now.

**BelongInOakland** · 03-19-2012, 10:09 PM

when Jon Gruden left the Raiders, it was not talked about that much, like Al Davis and Jon Gruden kept very silent, quiet about it, also, i believe the Raiders possibly could have won back 2 back Super Bowls in 2001 and 2002, 2001 if not for the Tuck Rule game, and 2002 if Gruden was still the Head-Coach, it's pretty obvious why we got slaughtered by the Buccaneears in that 2002 Super Bowl run. Some people say Gruden chose to leave in the first place, others say he was fired but Al Davis made it look like he was traded for a couple of Draft picks, but, was it really because Al Davis was getting jealous, envious that Gruden was getting a lot of the praise, admiration for the Raiders success? Al Davis wanted to be the one known as responsible for the Raiders success? I know the past is the past, but i feel those Raider dark years could have easily been prevented

**HITMAN** · 03-20-2012, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by regret

I think the larger problem is he was trying to run the organization as he did in the 70s and 80s despite the fact his failing health and loss of mobility no longer allowed him to watch over every little detail like a hawk. There was a time he could hold everyone accountable but once that time passed a restructuring desperately needed to take place and didn't... until now.

I would also add that while everyone else had to be accountable Davis for whatever reason did not hold himself to the same standard, which can be a huge detriment.

**Sacguy74** · 03-20-2012, 06:47 AM

Nice write up man, thanks. The Jon Gruden trade did not help and to the Nation he will always be 'the one that got away.'

I think Al's problem as he aged was he seemed to undervalue the opinion of others in his advanced years. He was constantly at odds with the coaches and never hired the appropriate 'structure.' Al tried to do everything with bad health when he would have been more valuable in a personnel/scouting advisory type role.

**ThirtyFour** · 03-20-2012, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by DSOTM

In Als defense, who were we suppose to draft instead off JaCarcus? The Raiders needed a qb and it was either fatty or Quinn

This is not hindsight me saying this. It's what I said at the time.

Calvin Johnson was the 100% obvious pick.

Why? Calvin was the best WR prospect in the modern era. That doesn't mean he's the best, that means I don't think a WR since the merger would have had a higher draft grade. Calvin had insane measureables, insane production in a horrid system with a bad QB, was a workaholic, incredibly intelligent and humble, and a great person.

Jamarcus was a one year wonder at college. And his one year wasn't even *that* elite. The two years before that were rather average and he wasn't even the locked down starter on his team. When you draft a QB #1 of utmost importance are the number of starts in college and more then one year of an elite level.

Really, if it wasn't for the Sugar Bowl against Quinn no chance he goes #1. He's the exact opposite of Luck, who was pegged as a #1 overall pick type of QB for 3 years.

Just because you have the #1 pick and need a QB doesn't mean you have to take the highest rated QB on your board. Value wise JR was a crap pick. He had ample opportunity in college to prove he was an elite QB and he never actually did it.

**kinz** · 03-20-2012, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by ThirtyFour

This is not hindsight me saying this. It's what I said at the time.

Calvin Johnson was the 100% obvious pick.

Why? Calvin was the best WR prospect in the modern era. That doesn't mean he's the best, that means I don't think a WR since the merger would have had a higher draft grade. Calvin had insane measureables, insane production in a horrid system with a bad QB, was a workaholic, incredibly intelligent and humble, and a great person.

Jamarcus was a one year wonder at college. And his one year wasn't even *that* elite. The two years before that were rather average and he wasn't even the locked down starter on his team. When you draft a QB #1 of utmost importance are the number of starts in college and more then one year of an elite level.

Really, if it wasn't for the Sugar Bowl against Quinn no chance he goes #1. He's the exact opposite of Luck, who was pegged as a #1 overall pick type of QB for 3 years.

Just because you have the #1 pick and need a QB doesn't mean you have to take the highest rated QB on your board. Value wise JR was a crap pick. He had ample opportunity in college to prove he was an elite QB and he never actually did it.

^ Yep, JR was a poor choice even at the time.

**BelongInOakland** · 06-25-2012, 06:41 PM

i'm kind of a relatively new Raider fan, i did not become a fan until my freshman year in High School, which was the 2002 season, but what was the true explanation, meaning, reason behind the Al Davis-Jon Gruden fallout, break-up? How come Al Davis and Jon Gruden could never work it out? what were the specific, detailed reasons why? It still mind boggles me, confuses me, as to why the Raiders did not even bother changing the playbook, plays after Gruden left when the 2001 season ended, thats why the Raiders got killed by the Buccs in that Super Bowl, Jon Gruden was absolutely ready for us that game, he knew everything Rich Gannon and the Raiders going to do, knew all the plays like the back of his hand.

I know this is the past, we have to move on, but i will say we are still in the Dark-Ages because we have still not made the playoffs since 2002, once we finally make the playoffs again, then i will say we are out of the Dark Ages.

**s_adams66** · 06-25-2012, 07:44 PM

I think the problem started when Al Davis traded for Jay Schroeder. Jim Lachey had just made the Pro-Bowl in the season before we acquired him. Schroeder had lost his job with the Redskins to Doug Williams. Schroeder had the gift of an arm but his mechanics were all messed up. He had the size of a franchise QB but not the numbers. So Al traded a Pro-Bowl OL for a physically gifted QB. Todd Christensen went on the record at the time that Al Davis was "always the guy that overcame numbers. He didnt believe that you had to be a certain size or have the right time in the forty. Now he's got a QB who comes right out of the computer-Jay Schroeder has the perfect size and a great arm. But he's not a great QB."

Furthermore Tom Keating and Marv Hubbard noticed that Davis and his scouts were succumbing to the same weakness with other players. "He used to be a guy who looked at what a player did, not what he looked like" Keating said. "His strength was that while everybody else was going by a guy's forty times , or his height and weight, he would pick a guy who didn't fit the numbers but who got the job done. Like me. I was never big enough, according to the scouts. But now he seems captivated by the numbers. He'll pick a guy on the strength of his speed or his size, and a lot of these guys have been busts."

**B. anthracis** · 06-25-2012, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by BelongInOakland

i'm kind of a relatively new Raider fan, i did not become a fan until my freshman year in High School, which was the 2002 season, but what was the true explanation, meaning, reason behind the Al Davis-Jon Gruden fallout, break-up?

All the following answers are my opinion and certainly not factual, but here goes...

Al was old school. Real old school. He had Gruden locked down to a contract that said he had to pay him X amount of money for Y amount of time and that was that. After Gruden's 2nd season it was pretty clear that we had something special going with him. At the end of the 3rd year, with a trip to the AFC Championship game, pretty much any other owner in the league would have redone Gruden's contract and paid him commensurate with the the best coaches in the league. Al did not. Instead, Al exercised the option to pay Gruden the original contract number, thereby keeping him among the lowest paid coaches in the league. When that happened, it was the death knell of the relationship.

How come Al Davis and Jon Gruden could never work it out? what were the specific, detailed reasons why?

Besides the contract issue, Al treated Gruden poorly by all accounts. Once, when asked in a press conference if he thought Al respected him, Gruden paused for a minute and thought about it. Then he very doubtfully said "I think he does." It was obvious Al didn't respect him. There were lots of stories of Al berating Gruden behind and doors and front of the staff and team after losses. In addition to that, Gruden ran the WCO and Al never had and never would believe in that philosophy. It was almost as though Al resented winning with a style of offense that was that opposite of his. IOW, doing things Al's way, for better or worse, mattered more than winning football games.

It still mind boggles me, confuses me, as to why the Raiders did not even bother changing the playbook, plays after Gruden left when the 2001 season ended, thats why the Raiders got killed by the Buccs in that Super Bowl, Jon Gruden was absolutely ready for us that game, he knew everything Rich Gannon and the Raiders going to do, knew all the plays like the back of his hand.

There was no way to change the playbook in less than one week. Even with the two full weeks that teams get now, it wouldn't have been possible. But what would have been possible is to change up some of the language and use a silent count. It wouldn't have been a perfect strategy by any means and it would definately kept us from scoring as many points as we usually did back then, but it certainly would have been better.

And if the players are to be believed, Bill Callahan changed the gameplan two days before the game. He'd initially installed a gameplan based on the run. We were going to attack Tampa's 3-4 straight on because we had huge linemen and they had smallish d-linemen. Going back to one of the last games of the season, this type of plan had worked well for Pittsburgh vs. the Bucs. They ran all over them and stomped them into the ground on their own turf. But then Callahan changed it back to our normal pass heavy offense and that played right into the strengths of Tampa's D.

Finally, there's just the matter of bad luck. First with facing any Gruden led team. What were the odds of that? Any other team in the league or even the same Bucs team coached by anyone else would have had their asses handed to them by us. Second, but very important was the Barret Robbins incident. The team woke up Sunday morning to learn that their Probowl center had up and disappeared and wouldn't be playing that day.

It was just a sh!tstorm of bad luck and highly unlikely circumstances. The Bucs were a good team, no doubt about it; and they found themselves in a situation that was highly fortuitous for them and incredibly unfortunate for us.

I've never watched the "highlights" of that game and I never will.

**jcwatchdog** · 06-25-2012, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by Sea Of Hands

Raider Dark Age, 2003-2009

The Raiders tried to pull out of the disaster in 2007 by selecting Russell with the first pick in the draft. With the offense built around Gallery and Grove completely dismantled, Al figured that a good start would be the best QB in the draft, which was the consensus opinion. Again Al made the wrong choice. The Russell debacle cost the Raiders three more seasons in the cellar of the NFL. Many have criticized Davis for his choices during the Dark Age of 2003-2009. I offer you the idea that when Al made the “right” choices, it backfired and caused more trouble than all of the “wrong” choices he had supposedly made over the years. Al got burned. I guess he had it coming considering the great number of times that Al burned his collegues over the years on his way to the top of the NFL. Gallery, Grove, and Russell brought the Raiders to their knees. Glad their all gone.

The simple answer is that Al Davis surrounded himself with a bunch of "yes" men who were too afraid to say anything that was contradictory to what Al said. To keep their job it was just easier to go along and champion everything Al Davis said and did, even if it was completely illogical. Couple that with getting rid of the only coach in a long time that actually made a difference didn't help. Al's ego got in the way especially when Gruden was winning his way. "Just win Baby" changed to "Just win Al Davis' way or don't win at all". When Gruden became the face of the franchise, Davis couldn't handle it. He had to prove the Raiders could win again his way like they did in the past and so he went on a journey to build another team with his stamp on it. It didn't work. He got more and more erratic as time went on, probably due to old age. Can anyone really tell me why an NFL owner would even bother holding a press conference about a fired coach, complete with an ancient overhead projector?