Stanny: My bad. I meant skilled players, not OL. After Jackson went down, we had nothing in the backfield.
Nothing? We had a guy by the name of Marcus Allen after Bo went down. In fact the game Bo went down in the 90-91 playoffs against the Bengals, Marcus comes off the bench and runs for 140 yards. Willie Gault wasn't all world but the 4yrs the guy was there he averaged 630 yards and actually lead the team in 1990 with 985 yards. He was brought in to stretch the field and that's what he did. He wasn't brought in to be the number one guy. Timmy was used a ton right off the bat. Guy was returning punts, kickoffs and lead all the WR's on the team in 1988. Then 89 the guy hurt his knee, 90 he was brought along slowly and then 91 and beyond he was their guy. Actually in 91 they spread the ball around quite a bit and friggen Ethan Horton our converted TE was the leading receiver on the team.
Um, I disagree regarding the Stabler Raiders. Check the stats, they were very similar to Shell's Raiders. Stabler got into it with Davis and said he wishes he'd have handled it differently. It was about the way he ran the game.
I provided you real time stats in my previous post
In fact you look at the numbers: Stabler was the starting QB from '73-79. In that time frame they ran the ball 4,057 times and passed the ball 2,669 times.and they ran the ball nearly double the times they passed the ball.
Again, Stabler was traded because he was standing with no knee caps and didn't have the arm that Davis envisioned or ever really accepted. Thus he went after Dan Pastorini.
Excellent example of what you're supposed to do to grind out the clock. The problem is, you have to be able to execute it. And again, I ask you if you think our line is capable of doing it.
I think our line has a better chance to succeed with run block verse our pass blocking yes and when going into the 4th quarter with a lead during the last 5 minutes of a game I would rather have the ball being put in our RBs hands then dropping back 5-7 steps and throwing the ball with this current team and scheme. Generally I hate grinding the clock by running left or running right or being conservative unless that was your success through out the course of the game. I hated when Gruden did this and actually enjoyed the approach Callahan took and kept on with his game plan.
The plays have been mixed up well enough when we've attempted to grind it out. So I ask again, what adjustments do you make when your players aren't executing?
Well you don't keep on running them if that's the case. Or the real answer is that they as a coaching staff need to work on that. Again, we can't even simply throw the ball to our RB's of the the backfield. Every mild attempt looks like a struggle as there is no timing. The screen passes; the few that have been ran are just horrible. One adjustment I would make would be on our trap plays as the timing is beyond crappy and first focus those guys up front with man on man schemes or I would pull Boothe more and run to the left side of the line which has been our stronger side during run plays. Second why not shorten up the routes? We can't pass block, so why not hit a quick strike and put the ball into our play makers hands? A three yard pass with the possibility of our WR to make a play is just as good as a 3-4yard run.
Go to another running play they won't execute? Throw the ball which you're not willing to do? Please explain. I'm waiting for something that you haven't given me.
Again, I talk about going into the 4th quarter with a lead with 5 minutes or less on the clock and yes I would run the ball. By running the ball I just wouldn't line up 11 guys and run strait ahead. Put the friggen full back in motion, hell put the tail back in motion, line the TE up in the backfield to keep the defense guessing. We line up two WR's wide, a full back and tailback and hand the ball off. Well we can't dominate no one so that doesn't work. Walsh may attempt a motion other then a simple WR going from left to right , once or twice with his formations and then bails back to pop warner formations.
Ohhhhhh, so White was coaching under Flores too? No, he wasn't. Those RB passes were there then too. That doesn't fly. We throw to the TE now, there's no difference from then. In fact we've already completed 1 more pass to the TE than Turner's offense did all of last year.
I never once mentioned that White did coach under Flores? However I did say that the Raiders have been running the same offense since Madden was coach in which you tend to not agree. And I also stated that while White was coaching QB's and so fourth, they "rolled" the QB out by design and they involved the RB's more on the receiving end. I'm sure it's in the Irons Chefs playbook to do such, his mind just doesn't allow him to call those types of plays.
Yes, the old archaic offense argument. They didn't run the bunch then, they didn't use spread concepts back then, both of which this offense has used.
All offenses use different terminology, some say a bunch formation with three WR's, some teams say trips, some teams say bunch, some say, 3 group bunch and it goes on and on. And back then when are you referring too? The Raiders used multiple WR's through out their history. They simply would line up the TE or a RB and two WR's at the wideout spot thus creating a spread or bunch formation, so yes they did run a spread and at times bunched them up. But again if you are talking 70's ball in which they ran these formations the concept was to pound the rock first, pass the ball second.
Go fish on that stale argument.
Do you have any Kings?
We agree to disagree...You like Walsh, I don't.
