Raiders coaching search=wish sandwich

[JC]

I know what some of you are thinking...what the hell is a wish sandwich.

A Wish Sandwich noun-when you have two pieces of bread, but no meat, usually just mayonaise, salad dressing or mustard.

That's how this coaching search feels to me, we have nothing to fill the wish sandwich.

We are looking at all the wrong people, defense wins championships. Black coaches have shown a greater success rate than the white ones in recent memory.

I really like Whisenhunt, but I like Singletary, Tim Lewis, or some other defensive gurus.

 

[BlueDamsel]

So what you're saying is get rid of the mayo & bring out the Nutella??

 

[JC]

I hate the taste of hazelnut and retreaded coaching.

 

[Angel]

Poor JC!! You never know....you might just get a HC you can stomach!!

 

[Crow]

Tim Lewis? The guy who got drummed out of Pittsburgh for being unable to adapt to multiple WR formations? Pass. He'll be a Rooney Rule candidate for the rest of his career, IMO.

I want a defensive guy too, but I can't see hiring a guy based on skin color. That's a recipe for disaster.

 

[JC]

Hmm...Tim Lewis' defense didn't look that bad as the G-men...with what, two double digit sackers?

I am not saying hire a guy based on skin color, just to not rule out the possibility. That's more a message leaguewide than for the Raiders.

 

[Angel]

Hmmmmmmm.....Art Shell again? I'm sure Al has someone great in mind!!

 

[Crow]

Hmm...Tim Lewis' defense didn't look that bad as the G-men...with what, two double digit sackers?

I am not saying hire a guy based on skin color, just to not rule out the possibility. That's more a message leaguewide than for the Raiders.

I'm gonna have to take Moss' stance on that. I couldn't care less if our next HC is black, white, or pinstriped. If you can coach, bring your ass here.

 

[Angel]

I'm gonna have to take Moss' stance on that. I couldn't care less if our next HC is black, white, or pinstriped. If you can coach, bring your ass here.

Mike Tice still available? You could have the reunion in Oakland....Tice/Moss/Culpepper?

 

[TommyGirl]

Mike Tice still available? You could have the reunion in Oakland....Tice/Moss/Culpepper?

Eeeeyeah. That's very funny.

My guess is Whisenhunt or Haskell, if the Bay Area Press and their wild speculation is anywhere near to accurate.

Of the two, I'd actually lean toward Haskell, believe it or not. I find the idea appealing largely because he's been under the tutelage of Holmgren, whose offense I like. He's also been the position coach for all of the primary offensive positions, save quarterback.

My BIGGEST concern when weighing the pros and cons of these two coaches is that the quarterback situation with the Raiders is...well...everybody knows what I think. Haskell's offensive scheme won't work any better than Norv's did if the Raiders don't get themselves atop the QB quagmire. If Haskell (Holmgren) run an offshoot of the Coryell offense, then you know that it relies largely on precision routes and a smart quarterback. I see neither on this team as it exists. Curry was the best route runner the Raiders had.

On the other hand, Whisenhunt's offense is predicated almost solely on the run. With the O-Line the way it is now and Jordan having proved little to me, I'm concerned. On one hand, I love the offense because of the play action (IMO, only Indy's play action is superior) and because of the opportunities to use the TE (ala Heath Miller). However, the Raiders don't have a Heath Miller.

I guess the bottom line (for me) is that the Raiders are going to have to look at key positions on offense for me to be comfortable with either of these hirings. I'm not saying to go out and draft a runningback, tight end, or quarterback. I am saying that it'd be foolish for anybody to think that the Raiders woes will be solved by the hiring of a coach, no matter how good he might be.

 

[Crossbones]

TommyGirl is IN DA HOUSE!!!

Excellent post TommyGirl.

Frankly I hadn't heard the Haskell rumor. And yes that Seattle offense is problematic for opposing defenses.. But then they do have a pretty gpood guy at QB (Holmgren was right). On that subject, I remember Seattle fans wanting to run Hallselbeck out of town. They thought he was the worst QB on earth and up until two yesrs ago they felt the same about Holmgren. Funny what a couple of wins in the playoffs and a trip to the Super Bowl will do for the psyche of the fan!

 

[Angel]

Excellent post TommyGirl.

Frankly I hadn't heard the Haskell rumor. And yes that Seattle offense is problematic for opposing defenses.. But then they do have a pretty gpood guy at QB (Holmgren was right). On that subject, I remember Seattle fans wanting to run Hallselbeck out of town. They thought he was the worst QB on earth and up until two yesrs ago they felt the same about Holmgren. Funny what a couple of wins in the playoffs and a trip to the Super Bowl will do for the psyche of the fan!

What rock you been sleeping under Cross? How did the Haskell rumor slip by you?

 

[TommyGirl]

Funny what a couple of wins in the playoffs and a trip to the Super Bowl will do for the psyche of the fan!

*Sigh* No kidding. Weren't we in the same boat 'round about 2000, 2001, 2002?

My psyche needs healed. I hope the Raiders pull it together. And soon.

 

[Chris_77]

I don't see Haskell in Oakland for the very reasons that TommyGirl stated. That type of offense usually takes at least 2-3 years to implement and we all know about Al's aversion to waiting. On the other hand, Whisenhunt's offense is more a matter of attitude than personell and can be instituted rather quickly with the addition of a couple FA OL'men.

 

[Rupert]

TG hits all the major points. Any offense that requires a smart QB won't work immediately in Oakland. We could get away with the softer routes with a smarter QB, but soft/freelance routes and a dumb QB is the recipe that killed the offense last season.

Part of the reason Indy and Pittsburgh had great play action was the fact that they had dangerous running threats. Defenses had to react to that threat. Kerry Collins has as good a play action move as Roethlisberger, but he didn't have the running game to support the fake.

One of the reasons the Raiders rushing attack was limp was the transition to an Indy-style blocking scheme. It relied heavily on outside zone blocking and cutbacks. The O-line, while being essentially the same line that was decent in the running game previously, wound up not knowing how to consistently execute the scheme.

And you're right, a new coach will have to make a lot of tough decisions. Continue the work started last season implementing the zone blocking scheme on O or go back to what worked better in the past? That will really decide how effective the offense will be next season. Will they continue to improve with the defensive scheme from last season, or will the HC ask Ryan to go in another direction? Those two things and some key personnel decisions will determine whether we improve or remain bogged in the mire.

 

[TommyGirl]

On the O-Line...I found myself puzzled at why there were key pieces missing to this purported Norv Turner offense. When in Dallas and Washington (and to a lesser degree, Miami), Norv's O-Lines always had a tremendous amount of guard pulling, largely for misdirection. That enabled more options for fullback traps, etc. That simply didn't happen last year.

As for zone blocking...You're right. The new coach will have to make a lot of tough decisions, not the least of which is to decide whether or not they're ready to ask the guys to start cut blocking. There is no better way to seal pursuit from the backside. Is the staff ready to join the ranks of the Falcolns and Broncos (who run the most effective zone blocking schemes out there)?

What I hate most about zone blocking is that it's so frickin' lateral. It's not a forward enough push for a power running game and Jordan has shown the frustrating propensity to dance around instead of hitting the hole quickly. Those holes open quickly and they close quickly. Compare the running styles of Mike Anderson, Warrick Dunn, and then look at Jordan. That's the best illustration I can give.

Plus (and I haven't taken the time to look at player size), it seems to me that the guys we have on the O-Line are more physically suited to man blocking. Seriously. They just look gargantuan and like teenagers just figuring out what to do with their maturing bodies. I'd wager twenty bucks (without looking) that Oakland's O-Line is huge compared to Denver and Atlanta. Players have to be taught, sure, but schemes have to be built around their individual physical strengths and abilities. I don't think zone blocking is doing it for these guys.

So, this is the long way of going about saying that if I ruled the Raiders, I'd go back to a man blocking scheme. It's more suited to Jordan's running style, as well as to individual players on the O-Line. Plus, I don't wanna see that crap cut blocking on my team. It's dirty.

 

[Crossbones]

On the O-Line...I found myself puzzled at why there were key pieces missing to this purported Norv Turner offense. When in Dallas and Washington (and to a lesser degree, Miami), Norv's O-Lines always had a tremendous amount of guard pulling, largely for misdirection. That enabled more options for fullback traps, etc. That simply didn't happen last year.

As for zone blocking...You're right. The new coach will have to make a lot of tough decisions, not the least of which is to decide whether or not they're ready to ask the guys to start cut blocking. There is no better way to seal pursuit from the backside. Is the staff ready to join the ranks of the Falcolns and Broncos (who run the most effective zone blocking schemes out there)?

What I hate most about zone blocking is that it's so frickin' lateral. It's not a forward enough push for a power running game and Jordan has shown the frustrating propensity to dance around instead of hitting the hole quickly. Those holes open quickly and they close quickly. Compare the running styles of Mike Anderson, Warrick Dunn, and then look at Jordan. That's the best illustration I can give.

Plus (and I haven't taken the time to look at player size), it seems to me that the guys we have on the O-Line are more physically suited to man blocking. Seriously. They just look gargantuan and like teenagers just figuring out what to do with their maturing bodies. I'd wager twenty bucks (without looking) that Oakland's O-Line is huge compared to Denver and Atlanta. Players have to be taught, sure, but schemes have to be built around their individual physical strengths and abilities. I don't think zone blocking is doing it for these guys.

So, this is the long way of going about saying that if I ruled the Raiders, I'd go back to a man blocking scheme. It's more suited to Jordan's running style, as well as to individual players on the O-Line. Plus, I don't wanna see that crap cut blocking on my team. It's dirty.

Rep!

Great post TommyGirl. All that just makes a lot of sense to me. I wish we get this Whiz guy...he looks to be just the ticket to figure out the direction to point the bus (no pun intended).

 

[JC]

Everytime someone talks about how great zone blocking is...all I can think is that the Houston Texans run it? That doesn't say much for it being the end all O-line scheme, it's like WCO or the 3-4 defense, if you don't have the personel, it will not succeed.

I think man blocking is a great idea, Jordan is not a slasher, he's pretty north/south, alot of his issues with happy feet seemed to be in the cut back lanes.

 

[TommyGirl]

I think man blocking is a great idea, Jordan is not a slasher, he's pretty north/south, alot of his issues with happy feet seemed to be in the cut back lanes.

That's the thing: Jordan has not been a north/south runner. North/south runners hit the hole hard and fast.

One question: WHAT cutback lanes? Ain't none in Oaktown!

 

[Crossbones]

That's the thing: Jordan has not been a north/south runner. North/south runners hit the hole hard and fast.

One question: WHAT cutback lanes? Ain't none in Oaktown!

This was my thought too.

I was actaully disappointed with the lack of North/South running Jordan did last year. Now it may have been because there was just no place to run but I was frustrated how many times he tried that little jitter bug move to the outside (especialy running to the left) and he'd usually get stuffed for no gain. Stop that damn it.