A_Ahouse... thats 4 division wins and a 4-2 record there. This is a team that hasn't won a divisional game on the road since Gannon was on the team.
And you are basically predicting a perfect record vs. average teams. There was only two teams that could do that last year. Indy and NE. I don't think the Raiders are quite at their level yet. If they can beat every single below average team they face, they are good enough for 12-13 wins easy.
No, I don't think that the Raiders next year will be as good of a regular season team as Pittsburgh and the Giants were this past year. For that to happen, McFadden is the next LT, Russell is the next Brady, and their D becomes one of the better ones in the league. Not willing to buy into that until I see it. No offense.
Getting starters on both sides of the ball back in Ebenezer Ekuban and Ben Hamilton is a start for denver. they both got hurt in camp and missed all season. then going back to their previous defensive scheme before jim bates came in and tried to make a defensive scheme overnight. Plus the offense didn't need much except O-line help which they get with ben hamilton returning and drafting Ryan Clady who fits the offensive scheme well. Mike Shanahan doesn't lose in back to back season either. coaching plays a big part for success.
The Raiders could do well if JaMarcus Russell does well but until then teams will stack 8 or even 9 in the box and let their best corner cover curry who is the one decent wr there. Javon Walker got beat out by Brandon Marshall last year and went and cried about it demanding a trade. instead we cut the bum since no one wanted him.then oakland throws 55 mil at him? i know they needed wr help after losing Jerry Porter to the Jaguars but there was no good free agents this year and no other team would give walker that much without proving himself first. oakland was way too foolish and aggressive with that signing. he had one great year with GB and 1 good one with denver. Darrell Jackson would have been a better pickup. and cheaper. too bad denver got him. i see them winning between 2 and 6 games if jamarcus plays well, 6.
there is a reason that the 9ers cut Darrell Jackson and it wasnt because there was an adequate replacement. btw, oakland got that #6 rushing even with 8 in the box so i don't see what the problem was with our OLine to anyone that tried to use that as an excuse.
, oakland got that #6 rushing even with 8 in the box so i don't see what the problem was with our OLine to anyone that tried to use that as an excuse.
And that was through lots and lots of effort. Remember, they were 6th in yards, but only because only 3 teams ran more than they did.
When you look at the effectiveness of it, they weren't so good. A good stat for O-lines is how they do in power situations. Can they get those short yards where the push is what counts. The answer was no.
They were 25th in the league in regards to the percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, or any and goal down from inside the 2 yard line that achieved a first down or touchdown.
What about preventing their running back from getting stuffed?
They were 3rd in the percentage of runs that result in (on first down) zero or negative gain or (on second through fourth down) less than one-fourth the yards needed for another first down. That reads backwards, where the higher you are, the worse you are.
What about pass blocking?
Well only 5 teams had a higher sack per pass attempt ratio than Oakland.
No one is doubting that they got a lot of rushing yards. They tried to run it a lot. But they didn't get what you would expect out of a rushing attack that got that many carries.
They aren't 06 bad, and a lot of that has to do with throwing out Shell's antique offense. But they definately weren't a top 10 or 15 line.
Teams stacked the box on oakland all year last year? Denver didn't. #6 in rushing is a bright spot but not when you win 4 games. you will probably be good rushing next year too with all that talent at RB but that doesn't win you games. stopping the run does though and oakland was 31st in that catagory. i don't see any significant additions to avoid that again. their pass defense was good, 1 spot behind denvers. same with offense. balance is what makes teams succesfull and the Raiders dont have that on either side of the ball. just a side bet but i bet Darrell Jackson outperforms Javon Walker next year. thats a #2 wr vs a #1,
one more thing. oakland averaged 4.1 ypc. thats ok but with all the attempts they had they should have been better. denver for instance ran the ball 80 less times but only trailed oakland by 120 yards. they averaged 4.5 ypc and passed a lot more succesfully. their weakness was run d ranking 30th. offensively they were fine being above average running and passing. the pass d also ranked 7th.
Gents, I'm the last fan to hype the 6th ranked rushing attack of the Raiders last year just as I wasn't about to hype the #1 pass defense in '06. Stats are only say so much. Most posters on the Raiders board felt DMC was a bad luxury pick because the Raiders had 3 RBs have 100 yard rushing games last year.
Using common sense, you must take into account whether or not that translated into wins. Although the win total doubles to 4, that's just not acceptable. Teams need not only yards to win, but they also need to put up points. If I recall correctly the Raiders only had 11 rushing TD's all season and 3 of those were by Daunte Culpepper in one game versus the Dolphins(I swear we took some high powered cortizone shots before that game). Anyhow, DMC was a great pick because he does add a game breaking TD threat that team will definitely have to account for when game planning and in their on field execution.
Honestly, it's unfair to assume the Raiders passing attack will not improve knowing that McClown and Pepp are not behind center. Both have a high rate of turnovers, Pepp can't read defenses, and McClown arms strength tops out at 15 yards. Yes, he's not proven, but at least hasn't proven he can't succeed in the NFL like Leinart, VY(passing), Beck, Brodie, Alex Smith. etc. (BTW jury is still out on Cutler, but he seems to be able to hold his own). Besides, DMC and Zach Miller are going to help Russell's development immensely while the speed of Walker & Carter coupled with Russell's arm strength should really create problems for opposing defenses.
A_A House!! I am one of those who believes that DMAc was a luxury you guys cannot afford. You need to build a team starting from the lines. and Dorsey was the best player on many teams boards. He could have been a dominant force in the middle for years to come and if he stays healthy he will be a multiple pro-bowler. I think unfortunately Al Davis is till running this team and the coaches are his puppets... Any coach would have tried to improve the line, especially when they have a plethora of RBs, plus bush could have done the same things that Dmac is supposed to do....Raiders got caught up in the hype of passing up on the next Adrian Peterson...but DMAC is not as strong a runner as Adrian Peterson....
Are the Raiders gonna be good next season..It all depends not on DMAC but on Jamarcus... If Jamarcus even has a decent year, they should atleast not be a top 5 pick in the draft again. But they ain't making the playoffs for sure...and thats the only way a team is successful...and that is making the playoffs..no one remembers the teams that didn't make the playoffs..
Anyhow, DMC was a great pick because he does add a game breaking TD threat that team will definitely have to account for when game planning and in their on field execution.
exactly. we didn't have that threat with either lamont, dominic or justin. they would get to the second level but the explosion wasn't there to get through it. DMC has the ability to get to the next level and then break away for a chunck of yards. Not only that but he gives the Raiders a pass catching RB that is very helpful in running our offense.
