Jerry Porter...

[Angry Pope]

Brown: Door is open for Porter

September 17th, 2006

Former Raiders wide receiver Tim Brown recounted a talk with Raiders coach Art Shell on Fox Sports’ Pro Football Preview in which he said the Jerry Porter stalemate can still be salvaged.

“Had a little conversation with Art Shell this week,'’ Brown said. “He told me all this stuff that’s going on with J.P., his door is still open to Jerry Porter, if he wants to come in and talk, he can. But he doesn’t like the fact that Jerry’s putting stuff out there in there the locker room. That, he won’t have.'’

Two things:

1) If Shell wants to talk, he should bring Porter in instead of waiting. In a family, the parent doesn’t wait for the spoiled teenager to come around. As the bigger man, Shell ought to make the first move.

2) If Shell believes Porter is “putting stuff out there in the locker room'’ and isn’t dealing with it other than ignoring Porter, then the only thing that will happen is everything will get worse.

Talk to Porter, see if the situation can be salvaged. If not, send him on his way. Maybe they could try an arrangement like Tampa Bay had with Keyshawn Johnson _ banish him from the facility but swallow hard and pay him.

They appaerntly have no grounds for a suspension, because they would have done it by now.

The bottom line is the Raiders sunk a ton of guaranteed money into a guy who doesn’t love to play football. Anyone who truly plays because they enjoy it would be out there.

It’s not Shell’s fault and it’s not Porter’s fault. It’s the guy upstairs who signed off on paying him all that money.

_ Jerry McDonald

 

[Crossbones]

Can't diagree with any of this. If Art wants to make this work he'll have to be the bigger man and take the bull by the horns.

As for banishing Porter from the facility I don't think you can do that any more with the new CBA.

 

[Angry Pope]

Raiders' Cooper makes plea to get Porter on the field
Oakland's former starting receiver can only watch as the team falls to 0-2.

By Jason Jones

BALTIMORE -- Jerry Porter can help the Raiders' offense -- or so thinks backup safety and special-teams captain Jarrod Cooper.

"Jerry Porter, they need to put him on the field and let him do his job," Cooper said.

The former starting receiver was inactive for the Raiders' 28-6 loss to Baltimore at M&T Bank Stadium, not far from his hometown of Washington, D.C.

Teammates have said they are confused as to why Porter is not playing. Randy Moss said things were "fishy" in a radio interview before the season opener.

The Raiders traded starting receiver Doug Gabriel before the season and opted to start career backup Alvis Whitted instead of Porter, who clashed with coach Art Shell in February over wanting to work out in Florida instead of with the team.

It spilled into training camp when Porter said he wanted a trade. His agent has permission to seek a deal, but Porter said the Raiders have made the asking price -- reportedly one or two first-round picks -- too high.

Owner Al Davis also said Porter needed to pay back part of his signing bonus.

A calf injury kept Porter out the first two preseason games, and he was demoted to the third team.

Shell has said Porter needs to continue to work hard to earn playing time and doesn't believe playing Porter would solve the offensive problems.

"It's not the receivers," Shell said. "It's giving the quarterback enough time to throw the ball. We have receivers that can catch the ball, but we're not giving our quarterback enough time to throw."

Cooper, however, has seen enough.

"This is game two, and we ain't scored one touchdown," Cooper said. "That simplifies (things)."

Added Cooper on Porter's relationship with Shell: "They don't have to say nothing to each other. They don't got to look at each other. Just let (Porter) do his job."

Cooper said he doesn't know how the rest of the team feels.

"I don't care what they feel," Cooper said. "I see what I see. The whole team can be against me. I don't care. I know what it takes to win a football game, and (efforts such as Sunday's) ain't it."

Porter said he hadn't talked to Shell about the situation.

"That's not our job," Cooper said. "My job is special teams and third down. That's what I'm here for. Jerry Porter's job is to catch touchdowns."

Porter is known to be moody and immature, but he could help by catching short passes over the middle, not the strength of any of the other receivers, especially with the Raiders' shoddy blocking.

"No one's got to like him, no one's got to love him, you don't even have to look at him," Cooper said. "If you put his uniform on him and put him on the football field, he's going to do something. He's not an idiot. He may act like an idiot, but he's not."

 

[Angry Pope]

Cooper: 'We need Porter on the field'
As offense sputters, high-paid Raiders WR remains on sideline

By Bill Soliday


BALTIMORE — While Jerry Porter has remained in a garbled state of uncertainty, his teammates have avoided the topic as if it were an invasion of spiders.

Sunday, one Raider spoke out loudly about the wide receiver who was declared inactive by coach Art Shell for the second straight game Sunday. Porter spent the game on the sideline conferring with other receivers.

In the locker room after the Raiders fell to Baltimore 28-6, safety Jarrod Cooper was anything but bashful on the topic.

He said it was time for personal business to take a back seat to team need.

"Whatever coach and Jerry Porter got going on, they got to squash that," Cooper said. "(Defenses have) got nine guys on Randy Moss right now ... it just needs to be done."

"I don't care what it is. This is a business ... if they are not going to like each other, this team does not care about that. All this personal (stuff)? We need to get rid of that. We need Jerry Porter on the football field. That takes all 11 people off Moss."

Shell and Porter were involved in a confrontation this past spring over Porter's insistence on doing off-season training other than in the club's Alameda facility. In the end, Shell ordered the receiver out of his office. Since then, he has soft-pedaled the fact that the team's leading receiver a year ago has been deemed unworthy of being active. Sunday, the team had Johnnie Morant active in his place.

Shell said the Raiders' offensive problems — the Raiders have played eight quarters without scoring a touchdown — were not attributable to the fact Porter was not on the field.

"It's not the receivers," Shell said. "It's giving the quarterback enough
time to throw the ball. We have receivers that can catch the ball, but we're not giving our quarterback enough time to throw it."

Although he said he was speaking for himself and not for the entire team, some teammates agreed ... at least to a point. Asked if Porter was good enough to be playing or not, defensive tackle Warren Sapp said "Ray Charles can see that he can play. But something ain't going on, so somebody is making the decision that he ain't playing."

"I'm sitting over there next to Porter on the bench just looking at him and asking why the (expletive) are you sitting here," Cooper said. "I don't understand that. You're paying Jerry Porter to play and he's a player. This is Game 2, and we ain't scored one touchdown. Simple fact."

"He's a helluva athlete," defensive end Lance Johnstone said. "All that other stuff is just that ... other stuff. I don't know what they've got to do to rectify that situation, but it should be rectified some kind of way.

"It's not really a huge distraction that's causing all these (on-field) problems. It's just something that he needs to get handled."

 

[Angry Pope]

Just like I thought and have been saying all along, it is doing more harm than good and it doing damage to the team mind frame. They know that Porter has changed and is working hard.

 

[Angry Pope]

Teammates don't like Porter's benching

Bruce Adams and Nancy Gay

Monday, September 18, 2006

(09-18) 04:00 PDT Baltimore -- The apparent end of the Jerry Porter era is not passing quietly.

Wide receiver Porter, healthy and ready to play, was on the inactive list for the second week in a row and his relations with coach Art Shell beyond the breaking point.

Shell didn't say much about the decision to hold out Porter.

"We look at all the guys every week," he said, noting the Raiders weren't lacking for talent at wide receiver.

But some players weren't as diplomatic on the benching of the disgruntled Porter, who has demanded a trade.

"Jerry Porter is not going to embarrass himself if you put him out there in a uniform," said safety Jarrod Cooper, who added that players didn't care about another player's "personal issues."

"Ray Charles can see that he (Porter) can play," added defensive tackle Warren Sapp.

Porter was slowed early in training camp with a calf injury, but now is healthy. He was rarely used in the preseason and hasn't been getting many reps at practice.

Others on the inactive list included cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha (foot), linebacker Sam Williams (ankle) and tackle Robert Gallery (calf).

Bad exchanges: The Raiders fumbled four times on the exchange between center and quarterback, losing the ball three times.

They also possibly lost starting quarterback Aaron Brooks, who sprained the rotator cuff in his throwing shoulder trying to recover the second bobble.

Shell said more would be known after an MRI exam today, adding Brooks was still the starter if healthy.

Center Jake Grove said he didn't really know what caused the bad exchanges.

Shell said it was a number of factors: Grove squatting too low in one instance, quarterback Andrew Walter starting the play too early on another.

Injuries: In addition to Brooks, Shell said other players to leave the game with injuries included linebacker Grant Irons (back) and cornerback Fabian Washington (hamstring).

He had no further word on the severity of the injuries.

Guard Paul McQuistan also left the game, but his replacement by Kevin Boothe was a "coach's decision" and not injury-related, Shell said.

Pass protection: The Raiders tried a number of different schemes -- shorter quarterback drops, two-tight end formations -- to provide more protection for the passer. But Walter was still sacked six times.

"You've got to make the scheme work," Shell said.

Ekejiuba at linebacker: Special-teams standout Isaiah Ekejiuba played at linebacker for the first time, and though he posted only one tackle, the second-year player fed off the ferocity and attitude coming from the Raiders' defensive linemen.

"Our down guys, they're great. They're among the leaders on our team,'' Ekejiuba said. "We've got the sack leader (Derrick Burgess) last year and you've got big Warren Sapp out there and two other guys, Terdell Sands and Tommy Kelly, that can bring it.

"So when you see that kind of energy out there, you try to match it.''

No practice, no matter: Raiders return man Chris Carr, who is among the NFL's top 10 in kickoff returns, put on another impressive show, returning seven for 206 yards, including a long run of 45 yards.

Carr also returned four punts for 39 yards.

Afterward, Carr sat on a stool with a bag of ice wrapped tightly around his right calf. The strained calf might have kept him sidelined in workouts, but it didn't affect him on game day.

"I didn't practice all week,'' Carr said. "It's just a strain, but it was good to give it a rest.''

Briefly: Ravens placekicker Matt Stover's second field goal in the first quarter from 33 yards out was his 24th in a row, establishing a career-best mark for consecutive field goals. ... The Ravens open the season 2-0 for the first time in franchise history. ... Baltimore defensive tackle Kelly Gregg had two fumble returns, and his second -- a 59-yarder -- was the longest in team history.

 

[Crossbones]

My only point is this: if we think putting Porter into the lineup will change anything we're mistaken. Until that OL learns how to block we're screwed Porter or no Porter.

 

[Angry Pope]

We are making progress. With Porter in the lineup, it can only help Walter. The offensive line is a work in progress and will come around. Meanwhile, give Walter more viable options than an ineffective Whitted.

 

[Rupert]

So Porter's best friend on the team says Porter is working hard. Why am I not buying it?

The guy who wrote that article fails to mention or accept that Curry is better than Porter, especially at the short over-the-middle passes that Porter supposedly excels at.

Porter has one HUGE flaw as a reciver, he leaves his feet for anything above his stomach. That does not allow him to move immediately after the catch and often leaves him vulnerable to the big hit.

I agree with whoever thinks Curry should be our #2 WR instead of Whitted. Whitted is okay, but he reminds me too much of James Jett. All balls and no brains. Or more appropriately, good hands, fast feet, okay routes, but bad, bad instincts. Maybe Art likes that. I don't.

 

[Rupert]

Right now the depth chart should be Moss, Curry, Porter, Morant, Whitted. I put Morant ahead of Whitted because I think he brings more upside. Whitted is a nice injury replacement, but that's about it. Maybe we bring him in as a #3 to add the elite speed, but he's not as good as Jett, who was not as good as Branch. And unlike Branch, continually putting him on the field will not significantly improve his play.

 

[Crossbones]

So what is Sheel trying to prove with staqrting Whitted. Curry looks good to me. Morant has proved himself most times when he has had the opportunity (mostly in preseaon) -- what has Whitted ever done? I don't get it.

 

[Angry Pope]

So Porter's best friend on the team says Porter is working hard. Why am I not buying it?

The guy who wrote that article fails to mention or accept that Curry is better than Porter, especially at the short over-the-middle passes that Porter supposedly excels at.

Porter has one HUGE flaw as a reciver, he leaves his feet for anything above his stomach. That does not allow him to move immediately after the catch and often leaves him vulnerable to the big hit.

I agree with whoever thinks Curry should be our #2 WR instead of Whitted. Whitted is okay, but he reminds me too much of James Jett. All balls and no brains. Or more appropriately, good hands, fast feet, okay routes, but bad, bad instincts. Maybe Art likes that. I don't.

I don't know if Cooper is Porter's best friend. There are others on the team that don't seem to hate him. There have been more than one that have said that Porter is working hard on and off the field. Frankly, I believe that he is and he needs to play.

I think Art is trying to flex his muscle. Curry at two works for me...Porter at three also works.

 

[Rupert]

Whitted has gone the Jett route (so to speak - well, literally in many ways). I don't like it personally, but I was willing to give Art the time to prove he deserved it.

I don't say players hate Porter. I don't know where that perception comes from. Porter needed to be humbled. He needed to see Art was serious.

No, I don't believe Art needs to make the first step. I always apologized to my father, not the other way around. I always extended the olive branch, and it was never refused when it was honestly given.

That's where I differ with everyone who says put Porter on the field. It doesn't make sense until he apologizes to Shell. If Shell reverses, he loses everything he's worked for.

The same goes for the offense. People think that the offense should change because the players can't execute it. So you teach them to execute something else and they still fail. Then what? Right now we've got to get Shell's approach dialed in. It's okay to say it sucks if the team is executing and it doesn't win, but when the team isn't executing, don't blame the scheme, ESPECIALLY when last year's SuperBowl champs used a similar scheme.