Oakland drops ball on Russell

[jatfly]

Oakland drops ball on Russell
Contra Costa Times
Article Launched: 12/17/2007 02:59:50 AM PST


Related Stories
Dec 17:

SO WE GOT to see The Second Coming of JaMarcus Russell, otherwise known by the Raiders as "Our Franchise."

He claimed he learned "a lot" in his second NFL action, a three-series stint that merely interrupted Sunday's 21-14 loss to the Indianapolis Colts.

He should have learned a lot more.

He should have had a chance to run the two-minute drill before halftime.

He should have played more than the 11 snaps he got in the third quarter.

He even should have been out there in the final minutes of the Raiders' comeback bid.

"I wish more could have happened," Russell said, "but sometimes that's how things go."

He was going, going, gone to the bench after each of his three possessions ended in a punt.

How's that supposed to help his confidence? Asked if he wanted to stay in the game longer, Russell replied: "Oh yeah. Being a very competitive guy, I wish I could have stayed in there more. But Josh (McCown) has a lot of game-time experience, and the way the game was flowing, I'm pretty sure coach wanted him in there."

Russell's right. Coach Lane Kiffin explained that he wanted to win Sunday and felt that McCown gave the Raiders (4-10, mind you) the best chance to win.

Only the Raiders didn't win. They lost. And Russell lost out on opportunities that could have enhanced his NFL growth.

That's no indictment against McCown, who started his eighth game and engineered a gutty comeback try, not to mention a 991/2-yard touchdown drive in the second quarter.

But why limit Russell so much? Because you don't want to hurt his confidence? Please. He doesn't lack confidence. He oozes it. Unconfident guys don't drape diamonds around their neck, wrist and ears. He just lacks playing time.

Imagine what a boost in confidence he could have had if he was given a legitimate chance to be Sunday's hero.

Of course, this is a long-term plan the Raiders are employing. Russell's to be their hero for years to come.

Next year, however, he'll be asked to run that two-minute drill and lead comeback attempts in meaningful games. This one Sunday simply factored into the Colts' playoff plans, not the Raiders'.

When Russell debuted two weeks ago -- two second-quarter drives against the Denver Broncos -- he brought tremendous energy to McAfee Coliseum, and he teased us by showing off that big right arm.

Against the Colts, his entrance again brought the crowd to its feet. He attempted five passes and completed just two for 10 yards. When practice-squad call-up Chris McFoy whiffed on Russell's 15-yard rocket over the middle on third-and-10, that ended Russell's first series.

The following two possessions were three-and-out efforts, so Kiffin reinserted McCown.

Kiffin considered holding out Russell altogether, "but we had made such a commitment that we were going to play him and develop him and give him some snaps.

"Did that cost us from winning the game? I don't know that. I won't be able to answer that question for you. It was something that we decided to do and regardless we were going to make sure that we played him. Last time it helped, it created energy. This time it didn't."

So what would have happened if "some snaps" led to some touchdowns?

"If you draft a guy to be the future and he starts acting like the future, then you leave him in there. That's just my opinion," McCown said. "If he's playing at a high level and doing the same thing, leading touchdowns or whatever, I guess you leave him in there. We'll cross that bridge when we get there. But it's been good for him."

You know what else has been good? The Raiders offense.

The running game has been quite charming behind 1,000-yard back Justin Fargas and the occasional cameo from Dominic Rhodes.

The linemen are protecting so well, they haven't allowed a sack in three straight games. Really. It's true.

And it makes for an inviting environment to turn Russell loose.

"I'm a very confident guy," Russell said. "At times, you can get a little down on yourself. I'm pretty sure coach knows what he's doing. Whether he puts me in or takes me out, it doesn't matter. Because I'm going to go out there and help my team any way I can."

He should have been allowed to help out more Sunday. Maybe his third time out will be the charm we're all looking for from him.

Contact Cam Inman at cinman@bayareanewsgroup.com.



jatfly's judgement:

Hey I don't write the articles just re-post them.
I will say this I want the guy to suceed and need him to suceed. So what ever that takes. And lets' be honest it's not like we were winning every game this year....It's called Re-building for a reason....

 

[massraider]

This kind of second-guessing is as valid as any other opinion, I suppose.

 

[Rupert]

Who, at the time, thought Russell was going to lead us on a TD or even a FG drive? He was not playing well enough. Blame it on the plays, blame it on broken offensive rhythm. Whatever. The bottom line is it wasn't happening with Russell in there.

Sure it didn't happen with McCown in there either, but we had a better chance when he returned.

 

[Crossbones]

That article is BS. We were in that game against the World Champs. We got the lead in the fourth quarter and that clown wants to have the rookie in there? Screw him. I think Kiffin did it just right. I want the kid to play as much as the next guy but in rethinking this, the way we're doing it feels alright to me. I wanted to win that damn game. So it didn't work out. Can't fault coach for giving it 100%.

 

[RHC]

1. Russell should have been in there the entire second half. We still had a chance to beat them with Russell. But of course, you'd have to give the kid a chance to make plays, which obviously wasn't part of the plan.

2. He should start the next 2 games. But he won't and I have to seriously question Kiffin's judgement. Perhaps he's trying to build up his resume for the offseason by getting a win in these final games. Perhaps he's sticking it to Al for drafting a guy he didn't want. Perhaps he knows he's leaving the team and is so pissed he wants to set us back as much as he possibly can on his way out. Perhaps he's sticking it to Russell for holding out. Perhaps he's sticking it to the fans for daring to question his tactics.

Whatever the reason, it's just a flat-out bad use of valuable PT.

 

[Rupert]

2. He should start the next 2 games. But he won't and I have to seriously question Kiffin's judgement. Perhaps he's trying to build up his resume for the offseason by getting a win in these final games. Perhaps he's sticking it to Al for drafting a guy he didn't want. Perhaps he knows he's leaving the team and is so pissed he wants to set us back as much as he possibly can on his way out. Perhaps he's sticking it to Russell for holding out. Perhaps he's sticking it to the fans for daring to question his tactics.

Man, you're not making a lot of sense there. Let's take it point by point shall we?

"[Russell] should start the next 2 games." Why? Just because? He hasn't earned the start. Okay, but there's precedent. McCown deserves to be the starter, BUT he's not under contract to us for next season. If we want to win games next season he might be the quickest route to it. Will he take us to the playoffs? It's possible. Will he do much in the playoffs. I doubt it. Okay, he's a poor-man's Gannon that might just one day become a Gannon. I'll give him that much. But here he's nothing more than a placeholder for Russell. So there's some push to start Russell.

But he won't and I have to seriously question Kiffin's judgement. He probably won't, that's true. I could see him getting that start in week 17. That would make sense. He might get some 2-minute reps this week. That would give him enough of a round sampling to let him start. That's a possibility. I'm not sure how likely it is, but it's possible. I wouldn't even be surprised to see him start week 17 and not play more than a couple series.

Perhaps he's trying to build up his resume for the offseason by getting a win in these final games. I can only think of one reason to try to win the games. Well I can think of around 60+. The players and the organization. The players have to know the coach is putting them in position to win week after week. When they KNOW it, when they believe it, they'll sell out for the coach. When they don't believe it, they sell the coach out (like last season). Unlike Russell's first couple series against Denver, I saw the team want McCown back on the field against Indy. They want to win in the worst way. They do NOT want to go through the motions.

Perhaps he's sticking it to Al for drafting a guy he didn't want. That's going to help him how? Sour his relationship with Al? I know no-one else will think too much of it, but if he'll stick it to the guy who gave him a shot, what's he going to do to the next guy who gives him a job and upsets his fragile little ego? People would stay away if this was the case. Kiffin's going to keep it professional or he'll lose people's interest.

Perhaps he knows he's leaving the team and is so pissed he wants to set us back as much as he possibly can on his way out. See above. No-one would be interested in such a tempermental and petty guy.

Perhaps he's sticking it to Russell for holding out. Players have to trust a coach to sell out for him. If he'll do this to a superstar, what's he going to do to chump change? It's a recipe for disaster.

Perhaps he's sticking it to the fans for daring to question his tactics. Yeah, that's what he's doing? He's sticking it to you, that's obvious, but he doesn't even know who you are, much less do any of us know he wants to stick it to you. Come on.

 

[RHC]

Man, you're not making a lot of sense there. Let's take it point by point shall we?

Okie-dokie.

"[Russell] should start the next 2 games." Why? Just because? He hasn't earned the start.

He earned it by being the future of our franchise and by virtue of the fact that our season is toast. He needs the experience. I thought that was the obvious impetus behind my comment. My tune hasn't changed for months.

Of course everyone wants to win. So go out there and win with Russell. There's absolutely NOTHING that says we can't win with Russell. Why you seem to think that Josh By-God McCown is some kind of monster upgrade over even a green Russell is beyond me.

Perhaps he's sticking it to the fans for daring to question his tactics. Yeah, that's what he's doing? He's sticking it to you, that's obvious, but he doesn't even know who you are, much less do any of us know he wants to stick it to you. Come on.

Most of my speculation in #2 was tongue-in-cheek. However, the voice of the fans is loud and clear. He hears the boo's. He knows what the vast majority of Raider Nation thinks he should be doing. He's digging in his heels like a 4th-grader. He won't be seen as bowing to the demands of the fan base - or to the demands of Al Davis for that matter. More than one coach has been obstinate in this regard to the detriment of the team.

 

[Rupert]

RHC: Actually, Russell's performance has said we can't win with him, yet. Never said McCown was a monster upgrade, but I truly believe that if we had NOT given Russell those three series we'd have won the game. Of course anyone can speculate that we'd have choked down the stretch anyway. But I think we would have won if we hadn't put Russell in the game.

Sorry for reading #2 as bitter sarcasm rather than tongue-in-cheek. I wasn't at the stadium, and by the boo's I knew McCown was coming back in, but man I saw the offense respond to his being in. And despite the wasted three series with Russell in there, minus a bad no-call on pass interference, we'd have won the game anyway. I just see that as vindication of Kiffin's choice of QB. I think right now, based on their performance, the offense has more confidence with McCown under center. Yeah, that's purely subjective, but I think McCown's recent performance speaks for itself.

I think Kiffin has the team behind him, and I think he's lucky that McCown has started to perform. Hell, maybe it took the specter of Russell looming over him, maybe it took severe pain in his non-throwing hand. Whatever it was, McCown is performing now, and these guys seem to think they can win with him under center. I'd rather build off of that, as it seems Kiffin would as well. When the team has confidence, they can prop the rook up. When they don't they'd easily fall apart and drag him down with them.

Right now the offense seems to lose something with Russell under center. That will improve in time (so yeah, why not give him more time). The offense is just getting used to success. It's damned good for their morale, and falling apart while the rook gets his feet wet will be detrimental to their morale.

Only two games left and then the off-season, why worry about morale? When the guys are pumped to get back to work, they're going to work harder in the off-season, they're going to be more enthusiastic about participating in OTA's, and they'll be a step further along the development curve come the start of next season. I'm more pumped about that than I am about getting Russell a little more tune-up work.

This off-season will be telling for the club at QB. We'll have to add at least one vet, and it could be McCown coming back. Russell will have every opportunity to win the job outright, and Kiffin will probably put his full weight behind getting Russell game-ready. I see winning as far more valuable to the team's future than getting Russell a game-full of snaps.

 

[Crow]

Anyone else wonder if we would have beaten the Colts had we not put Russell in at all?

 

[massraider]

Anyone else wonder if we would have beaten the Colts had we not put Russell in at all?

no



123456789

 

[Crow]

Well, ya gotta admit. It was a lot closer than anyone thought it would be. Those couple series might have made a difference.

Probably not. Just something to ponder.

 

[S and B Executioner]

I say we start Russell for the last 2 games. Ya, we were in the game against the Colts. But we are done for the season and the kids needs toget some game pressure experience NOW.

Start Russell

 

[Rupert]

You know, I've flip-flopped on this again. Blame it on McCown actually looking like a viable QB. Blame it on the pass protection holding up. Blame it on Russell not being able to run the entire playbook. Whatever. When it didn't look like anyone was worth a damn I was all for starting RUssell and getting him the reps. Now that the team is getting momentum with McCown under center I think benching him would be detrimental to team morale.

My biggest concern with Russell under center now is the defense has had a taste of being off the field for long stretches, and they've lost the futility they began to cultivate last season. I wouldn't put Russell in for more than a taste here and there unless he starts performing. If he takes one of his three series and scores, dude gets another shot.

It's that simple in my book. The team is begining to believe. I don't want them to lose that edge they've just begun to hone.

 

[Madturk]

Some valid points here. It would be nice to win one of the two remaining games. It's too bad the SD game wasn't for their playoff lives. It would be extra special to end the season on a positive note like we did under Gruden when we beat the Chiefs a few years back.

I like what we've been doing with bringing in JaRuss on select series. It would be really tough to start him at Jax, especially considering how well they've been playing as of late. SD's going to be no cakewalk either as they're playing for playoff seeding. I'm more inclined to slow roll him and see if he's able to move the team on any sustained drives like Rupert alludes to. Of course if we're getting blown out, then put him in indefinitely.

 

[Rupert]

Of course if we're getting blown out, then put him in indefinitely.

Gotta agree with that. Can't get much momentum when you're getting blown out.

 

[poptart]

Anyone else wonder if we would have beaten the Colts had we not put Russell in at all?

It's possible.

The three 'drives' he QBed didn't amount to squat.

Perhaps the team might have added points -- or field position -- if McKlown had been left in.

 

[RaiderDestiny]

You know, I've flip-flopped on this again. Blame it on McCown actually looking like a viable QB. Blame it on the pass protection holding up. Blame it on Russell not being able to run the entire playbook. Whatever. When it didn't look like anyone was worth a damn I was all for starting RUssell and getting him the reps. Now that the team is getting momentum with McCown under center I think benching him would be detrimental to team morale.

My biggest concern with Russell under center now is the defense has had a taste of being off the field for long stretches, and they've lost the futility they began to cultivate last season. I wouldn't put Russell in for more than a taste here and there unless he starts performing. If he takes one of his three series and scores, dude gets another shot.

It's that simple in my book. The team is begining to believe. I don't want them to lose that edge they've just begun to hone.

What do we gain by winning the last 2 games? Play the rookie, get him game experience when it does not matter in a game time situation. I truly see no value in starting McCown even if we win. What do we gain for the future? Half of the team probably won't be here next year. Play the people that will be.

 

[Crossbones]

What do we gain by winning the last 2 games? Play the rookie, get him game experience when it does not matter in a game time situation. I truly see no value in starting McCown even if we win. What do we gain for the future? Half of the team probably won't be here next year. Play the people that will be.

Waht we would gain is that the players would buy into Kiffin's program even more. What we'd gain is the players wouldn't feel like it's hopeless in Oakland. We'd actually gain a lot going forward. Of course we'd lose draft position but then I really don't care. We can fuck up the #2 pick as well as the #8 pick. The players would love to play these last two games knowing that the coaching stafff hasn't given up on them and is trying to win as hard as they the players are.

So for the sake of the players who have gone through these last 4 years it would be a Godsend. Not saying we will or can win the last two but it would be great. Frankly I think we can take the Chargers at home. LT has to be held somewhat in check but look what we did to Addai. It can be done.

'Ya know --- just sayin'.

 

[Rupert]

Waht we would gain is that the players would buy into Kiffin's program even more. What we'd gain is the players wouldn't feel like it's hopeless in Oakland. We'd actually gain a lot going forward. Of course we'd lose draft position but then I really don't care. We can fuck up the #2 pick as well as the #8 pick. The players would love to play these last two games knowing that the coaching stafff hasn't given up on them and is trying to win as hard as they the players are.

So for the sake of the players who have gone through these last 4 years it would be a Godsend. Not saying we will or can win the last two but it would be great. Frankly I think we can take the Chargers at home. LT has to be held somewhat in check but look what we did to Addai. It can be done.

'Ya know --- just sayin'.

Couldn't REP you again so soon, but you get it. Man those players were pumped up when McCown joined the huddle in the second half. Maybe it was just the matchup. Maybe it was just the expanded playbook. But they really looked like a viable offense.

What was the problem on offense last season. Coach said, "Just do what I tell you." When the players asked "Why?" Coach couldn't tell them, "Because it works."

What can Kiffin tell the players with McCown out there? "Because it works." Why should the defense stay disciplined? Because the offense can score. You can't say that with Russell out there.

If our defense was complete AND top 10 across the board, we could ask them to suffer the rook's growing pains. We can't ask this defense to try to tough it out because it can't. They're just going to get hammered. They'll wear down. They'll give up those long 3rd downs. They'll give up the 2 point conversion. Etc. You can't tell them to bow their backs and stiffen up cuz they know it won't do any good.

That's what putting McCown out there does. Every series? Nope. He's not going to lead a scoring drive every series anyway. So we can definitely burn a couple or three drives on Russell. I wouldn't even be opposed to him starting the game and then hitting the bench, especially if he doesn't lead a scoring drive. Start the game and then the half? Not opposed if we're getting our a$$es handed to us.

They way it looks right now, Kiffin is handling it well.

 

[RHC]

You know, I've flip-flopped on this again. Blame it on McCown actually looking like a viable QB. Blame it on the pass protection holding up. Blame it on Russell not being able to run the entire playbook. Whatever. When it didn't look like anyone was worth a damn I was all for starting RUssell and getting him the reps. Now that the team is getting momentum with McCown under center I think benching him would be detrimental to team morale.

"Momentum" with only 2 games left??

That's about as useful and relevant as tits on a boar.

If you want useful momentum - to carry through to next season - you play Russell every snap from here on out.

Who gives a shit about this 2007 team's morale?? They've already burned this season to the ground. I care about the morale and development of guys like Russell and Mario Henderson, who will dictate our future level of success. I've been looking towards 2008 since we hit 8 losses.

You guys were all bitching about how we need a decent team around Russell before we play him. Now you're bitching about playing him because we have a decent team.

What a load of bullshit.

Fuck his so-called limited playbook. Let him go out there and bust some plays. Let him go out there and get hit. Let him go out and improvise and make plays. Let him go get his timing down. Let him cut it loose a few times.