Vertical stretch, with split backs, please
By Jerry McDonald - NFL Writer
Saturday, July 7th, 2007 at 8:28 am in Oakland Raiders.
(Note: Got an idea for the lead item on the blog? Send them to jmcdonald@angnewspapers.com. I’m out of town on vacation but will check e-mails daily)
By RIP Dan Birdwell
Raider detractors, and all too many Raider fans, believe that the vertical stretch is designed to air out the ball 20-30 times a game, winging the ball downfield with abandon.
That was never true in Oakland, and not really in San Diego where the concept began with Sid Gillman (and where Al Davis got his pro-football coaching start).
The premise of the vertical stretch is simple: make the defense defend not only with width of the field but also its depth. The free safety has to respect the deep ball, and so the offense runs against a seven man box.
Sneak the safety up, and to paraphrase John Madden, WHAP _ the ball goes long over the safety’s head for a very long gain. To have any real chance at completing the deep ball, then, you have to be able to pound the ball with the running game. And I mean pound, pound, pound. On play action, the defense is going to be caught dead, more times than not.
Back when the Raider Mystique was born, we not only ran our variant on the Gillman offense emphasizing power running, but we also ran from a split back formation. That changed when Marcus Allen arrived. Allen insisted on running from the I formation, like he did at USC and eventually got his way.
People who never really saw the Raiders before 1982 think that that’s the way it’s supposed to be. We have a chance to bring it back, this year.
The advantage of split backs over the I is flexibility, and it requires more from both running backs than does the I. Both guys have to be able to take the ball inside, yet have enough speed to go outside.
Both need to be able to catch the ball, and it really helps if they can get deep. Marcus Allen would have done even more in this formation given his gifts, but it was not to be. The defense lacks the “key” of watching the fullback to read the run, which will get more than a few guys thinking instead of reacting and make them much easier to erase with a block.
Enter “Lance” Kiffin. His relationship with Al Davis (note, not Mr. Davis) appears more collaborative than any other has been. Davis talks about how Kiffin reminds him of himself, Kiffin talks about how much Davis knows.
Kiffin knows how to use two talented backs in the same offense, getting each back 100-plus carries per season. The Raiders just happen to have on their roster LaMont Jordan, Dominic Rhodes, Justin Fargas and Michael Bush at halfback, in addition to Zack Crockett and Justin Griffin at fullback. All these guys can run between the tackles, with Fargas and Rhodes having the added ability to get wide. All of them can catch, and any of the halfbacks can beat a linebacker deep.
In 1967, 1969-1977, 1979-1981 at least two Raiders had 100-plus carries (in 1968 Hewritt Dixon had 206 Charlie Smith had 95 and Pete Banaszak had 91 carries), and that includes three seasons (’73, ‘75, ‘76 when three Raiders had 100-plus carries.
That means in 15 years of split backs (once we got a complement to Clem Daniels, in other words) in only two of those years did we not have have multiple backs with 100-plus carries. In the 22 years of the I formation (excluding the strike years) 13 times did we have multiple running backs with 100-plus carries.
We have the backs, and we have a coach who said he’s going to put his playmakers in positions to make plays. With that stable of backs, we have the personnel to run split backs. The flexibility and lack of a fullback to key on helps the O-line. After pounding away, up comes the free safety, and say goodbye to Jerry Porter, Ronald Curry and Co.
To repeat my order, I’d like a vertical stretch with some split back formations, please.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
July 7th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Nice job, RIP Dan Birdwell. I’ve been a diehard Raider fan since 1968, but I must confess that I was unaware that they ran a split back formation until Marcus arrived. Also, you might have mentioned that until 1978, they were only playing 14 games, which only bolsters your 100-or-more-carries stats. But back to the split back vrs. the I: which one did USC employ while Kiffin was there? (I honestly don’t know.) The answer to that question is probably the answer to which one the Raiders will predominantly run, I should think.
July 7th, 2007 at 8:55 am
you left out the fact that we had a hall of fame line. Much of that success had more to do with Gene Upshaw, Art Shell and Jim Otto than the formation itself.
July 7th, 2007 at 10:14 am
The time where the Raiders could be picky about the way in which they will play are long over. Right now we should worry about ekeing out victories with the worst offensive line in the NFL, not dreaming about the vertical stretch of bygone era.
July 7th, 2007 at 11:03 am
Hey bud, the whole league went away from the two back offense in the early 1980s, not just us. I blame Joe Gibbs, who turned the FB position into some kind of OG/TE. I’ve been waiting for someone to try it again. And forever, we ran that play where the RB would run a fly route - starting from Clem Daniels - it died with Harvey Williams, who tried to run it without success under Art Shell as late as 1994, and I haven’t seen it since. I wonder if any of our new guys could do that old long fly pattern … but a two back could work, if we bust through some preconditioning. Fun to think about it again.
July 7th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Great article. I like stats and this gives me a broader picture of a system I never got to watch unfortunately. The system is called a pro style system isn’t it? The 49ers ran that most of the time within their West Coast offense if I’m not mistaken. I like the split back specifically because you have 2 backs on each side of the QB who will see missed blocks coming and can move forward and help chip block. They can also delay block and then sneak out of the backfield into the flats and catch linebackers out of position. I think we have some talent for this system with Justin Griffith being perfect for this system because he can catch well out of the backfield but also run and pass block well. Jordan can be spotty but he’s effective enough. I like the system simply for the purpose of extra backfield protection for the QB. A back can help the line by catching anybody running around the outside or coming right down the middle.
We may have had a great line in the 70’s due to some great players but a system can be designed to take care of its players. A design can be a safety net and extra protection. This is what I see with that 2 back system.
I do believe however that we need to mix up the formations alot in order to keep the defense guessing. Create movement and put players in motion like Gruden did in order to read what the defense is trying to do.
July 7th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
RIP Dan Birdwell… Couldn’t agree more with you… except that Would like to see Curtis Brown in the mix, and Crockett out of it…
Domonic Rhodes played this formation a lot in Indy, they used it with ‘edge’ and/or addai in the start of the game in run situation. Later they used Rhodes in split, in a pass situation.
Furthermore, Huff is right, Griffith used be the one behind blocking for Vick in runs and passed to Dunn/Duckett.
I think and hope this formation will be a primary constellation, simply because it makes the defense guess if it’s pass or run - it’s harder to read.
July 7th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Since it is impossible for a team to play with a Hall-of-Fame offensive line, that is no excuse not to make every effort to run the ball. None of the guys from the 70’s were HoFers until after they retired. It is possible that none of them ever would have been had they been in another system or on another team.
This is an excellent article breaking down the need for establishing a running game in the league today. For as much as the media likes to keep their lips locked to P Manning’s backside, it was two 100-yard rushers and solid defense that got him a ring.
The Saints ran a lot of Pro formation last year with their two-back rotation. Brees was also rarely sacked.
Great article.
July 7th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
great read! a must-read for all raider fans, past and present. also, mr. marcus allen “pushed” for the “I” formation because he had very deceptive speed and great cut skills. however, in order for him to maximize these skills, mr.allen championed the “I” because he loved taking the rock between the guards and the center where he operated exclusively and most successfully. has anyone seen mr.allen get jammed squarely by opponents trying desperately to knock his head off? most likely not because he would slide off tackles and shed hits like he’s lubed. his skills running inside and opening up that enemy back zone d was an indication and reminder of how the raiders wing back sets punished the interior d-linemen and how the receivers abused opponents’ d-backs. this is why al davis emphasized that there be only one great center(s) anchoring that raider offensive juggernaut all those glory years, i.e., otto, mosebar, robbins, even dalby et al. he wanted to always have the backs taking the shortest distance to point a & b, and then, funneling in an overactive defense in order to set up those long shots “over the safety’s heads” and matching a back and a tight end with an opponent’s “funneled” linebacker corps. man, those were the days forever imprinted in memory. in lane kiffin, we might have a coach who understands and will implement the same motor on this present raider team.
July 7th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
No way in hell this line is going to enable a split back formation to succeed in this lifetime. Until they show me otherwise, I must maintain that this is the worts o-line ever. It’s hard to get to the outside when the defensive end is in the backfield as soon as the ball is handed off. Be as optomistic as you want, but I am a realist and the reality of things is that this line sucks nutz. Griffith, a true blocking fullback as opposed to Crockett, would be a wasted position in the split formation. The I formation is what we will see so Griffith can be a useful lead blocker and we can pound the ball against speedy defenses.
July 7th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Besides, even with a good o-line, these backs aren’t the ones.
July 7th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
I dont see the o line last year as bad as it looked. They pretty much were the same
bunch that were there last year and the year before that. I put at least 50% OF
the blame on our coaching last year. We looked lost out there.
GO RAIDERS
July 7th, 2007 at 8:35 pm
The Raiders won 3 Super Bowls in that era. We were also in contention to win the Big One every year! The O-line was the best in football. We currently have the worst. Also, we had great tight ends, running backs, receivers, and clutch quarterbacks. It will take time to build that type of team again. The Raiders have a hell of hill to climb. At least we are on the way up, instead of free-falling to disaster. The Raiders of 2007 just do not have enough players yet. Hopefully Russell and Miller will develop into hall of famers. Bush could end up being a steal. It will take time. I agree with your article though. I’d love to see the Raiders puund the ball establish the run and then WHAP. I just do not see Jordan/Rhodes/Griffiths as the next Van Eaegen/Davis/Banaszak ect. I think we need better players and more time. The Raiders are on the right track though. Great article!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:32 pm
Great artical but we all make mistakes…..
in San Diego where the concept began with Sid Gillman (and where Al Davis got his pro-football coaching start).
The Chargers played in LA not SD back in the day…..AlDavis coached with the LA Chargers and gave Bill Walsh his first Pro Coaching job……
PantyRaider…..FunRemembering!!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
I found the info to “Copy-Post” for your records…..
Davis’ first coaching experience in professional football came as the offensive end coach of the Los Angeles Chargers from 1960 to 1962. In 1963, at the age of 33, Davis became the head coach and general manager of the AFL’s Oakland Raiders
PantyRaider……Gilman-Davis-Kiffin Mix sounds like a Winner!!!!!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
NOTE TO THE MORON THAT RARERHOLIC, Dan Birdwell:
This version of the Oakland “boring” Raiders isn’t remotely simiar to the ‘67′-’81 Raiders.
This version of the Raiders scored 12 pathetic and measly TDs in ‘06. Rhodes wil be gone for 25% of the ‘07 season leaving overpaid, over-hyped, and oft’ injured, very average RB Lamont Jordan to carry the load and relieve pressure off whomever is the pour soul that is QBing the hapless Raiders.
TWERPING TRUTH
The Raiders offensive line is garbage. There is no quality at RB. There is no experience at QB. The TE is a nobody. At WR you have unprovens and quitters.
It all equals continued failure, especially when posed with the dominant RB and offensive in the AFC West and the NFL, namely, LT and the front five blocking for him.
TWERP’S FINAL THOUGHTS
A continue whooping of the Raiders is expected, especially considering the garbage personnel that the Al has assembled and the fact that they have the hardest schedule in the the ‘07 season, opponents have a .539 winning percentage.
Look for LT, Rivers, Gates, and the most dominate offensive line in the AFC West to continue cruising through the Raiders and the rest of the AFC on route to the playoffs.
GO CHARGERS!
July 7th, 2007 at 11:49 pm
Hey twatfan. It’s easy to rag on a team that has been down a few years. So tell me, how many S.B’S has your great franchise won? Thats what I thought! So in reality the DOLTS have been crap for how long? MAN THESE IDIOTS. GO RAIDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 12:10 am
I agree with White Trash, there’s no way we could run this offense with our line.
We need to start from square one. I sense that some of these Al Davis dweebs are already etching to bring back the vertical game. I would be fine with it, if there were no defense on the field. But being that it’s very likely we will see 11 guys on the opposite side of the ball, and an opposing defensive coordinator that knows we’re going deep and will build his whole weekly scheme around it, I’d say it’s a good idea to keep them guessing and take what they give us.
SHELL’S HAT!
Rock and Roll is dead.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:17 am
A Raider fan walks into a bar and tells the bartender to pour him 12 shots.
The bartender does, and the raider fan downs all 12 shots within a few seconds.
The bartender sais, “Wow, that’s some fast drinking.”
The raider fan sais, “Well, yeh, you’d be drinking fast too, if you had what I had.”
“What do you have?”, asks the bar tender?
The raider fan sais, “25 cents!”
July 8th, 2007 at 12:25 am
Hey twerpfan, go sit on a turkey baster.
It’s enough to have to deal with these Davis lemmings, but when a dolt fan sashays his ass across the room I really lose my cool. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and even Davis tards are right when they ask dolt fans like you one simple question, in response to your truckload of febble smash talk: “How many Lombardis, twerp”? You’re owned from that point on. So do us all a favor and get back to your donkey in Tijuana. Time is money.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:54 am
twerpfan! is it really worth the effort & the time to bash a seemingly “crappy” team like the raiders again?
greg poppa! what’s a “SAL”??? would that be the same as, “Stupid-As*-Lamebrain”???!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:24 am
“People who never really saw the Raiders before 1982 think that that’s the way it’s supposed to be. We have a chance to bring it back, this year.”
See, this is my problem. You’re talking about bringing back a 1970s offense, when it’s 2007! My god, we’ve got to let it go, man. You do realize that’s all we’ve tried to do since hiring Turner; Trying to rekindle that old vertical game in some form or another. It’s a different game now. Different defenses. You know, we made fun of Tom Walsh last season for running an ’80s offense. So, the answer is to go to a ’70s offense? How about a 2007 offense. Give Kiffin the keys in regards to offensive roster and gameplan, and let’s see what this guy can do. Screw the past. Every defense we face this year will be expecting us to try to be the old vertical Raiders. I want to win football games again. I’m tired of this s’t. Let Kiffin coach!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 3:08 am
Get a life you pathetic loser.
I’m gonna laugh when you bishes get handled this year.
July 8th, 2007 at 4:19 am
RobSac - you totally missed the point. It’s not old like last years schemes…
It would be like saying that 4-3 formation at defense is old too. It’s a basic formation.
This formation which gives the offense various possibilities in the same line-up. And more important it keeps the D guessing. Indy, Falcons and Rams (Saints in 06) have all used this formation in the last 5 year quite successfully, both in run and pass plays. Furthermore I think it’s easier to the O-line with split back than the ‘I formation’ because the ‘I’ formation is so predictable.
‘Formation’ and ’schemes’ are not the same. You can have a ‘formation’ from the 60’s with blcoking from today and it will work. On the other hand, if you take a ‘modern’ formation and let Shell handle the coaching with a block scheme from the 70’s - It wont work… You have to understand the differences of the terms.
Twerp - here is something you can go through, spelling and grammar - I hid something in there just for you, perhaps you’ll find it. And btw how does your trophy’s look? oh well…
July 8th, 2007 at 5:58 am
If the offensive line is what makes these offensive schemes/formations successful…what about the center position? The Raiders O line hasn’t had a smashmouth/kickass center with a bad disposition since Barrett Robbins pre-SB meltdown nor have they made much effort to fill this crucial position through the draft or free agency in the past few offseasons. Geat Raider teams of the past were always anchored by strong/hall of famesque centers… And next time lets keep an eye on our players during SB week- where was Jon Matuszak when we needed him?…
July 8th, 2007 at 6:13 am
PantyRaider,
Thanks for the catch. I ought to have simply referred to Chargerland, because the Bolts played in LA in ‘60, but from ‘61 onwards were in SD. So Davis got his start with Gillman and the LA Chargers in 1960, the moved with them to San Diego the next year. I wonder if that had anythin to do with his desire to move the Raiders TO LA. Hmmmm….
Peace
July 8th, 2007 at 6:26 am
twerpfan1,
To the main thrust of your comments, I’d just have to paraphrase a prolific writer: ‘I once met this sad little lizard who claimed he was a brontosaurus on his mother’s side. It cost me nothing to believe him, and it made him feel better.’
But please, RIP Dan Birdwell is a nom de plume, sir, madam or bisex. Dan Birdwell was one of the greatest pre-Davis Raiders, behind only Clem Daniels. Drafted as a linebacker, over the course of his career he played linebacker, defensive end and defensive tackle. In 1968 he almost literally played his heart out, making the pro bowl that one season because the Raider defensive line was so devastated by injuries that he sort of had to. That season effectively cost him the rest of his career, as he played only one more season. By all accounts (and I mean all, to an individual), Dan Birdwell was a great teammate on and off the field. He was a devoted father of three, who died at age 37 of massive heart trauma.
Throw whatever dispersion you would upon me, but I do ask you to show respect or at the very least not disrespect and truly outstanding man who happened to have played for the Raiders.
Peace.
July 8th, 2007 at 6:30 am
Mark Finzel,
I have this no longer secret hope that Michael Bush can be the next Clem Daniels-like back. While he’s sitting out and rehabbing, I’d have him working with WRs Coach Charlie Coe on catching over the shoulder. Thanks for thinking about it with me.
July 8th, 2007 at 6:41 am
La Milicia Negra,
I could not have written a better reply to RobSac. YES, there is difference between scheme and formation.
And while we’re talking old school, La Milicia Negra (and all others), what made the Raiders great was superior execution. The rebel image of the team belies the fact that the offense in part particular executed very well. However we do it scheme-wise, I hope (with some justification, I think) that Kiffin will be stressing just that. Our eleven have to beat the other eleven. I don’t think we need a Chuckie system, which emphasizes substitution and motion more highly than simple football execution. Football is a violent game, and the most elaborate systems will come crashing down in time (who plays the 4-6 defense anymore?)
Kiffin seems to have the smarts to keep the D off balance by running the right play our of the right formation at the right time. But we won’t even have a hint until the exhibition games begin.
But once again, ’twas well stated by you.
July 8th, 2007 at 7:05 am
offensive line, offensive line, and one more offensive line, will make or break the season.
I know its tiring to hear but, Sims, Gallery, and Grove are currently our starters. Is anyone concerned about these three duds… I keep reading about how they are looking for a position Gallery can play, its not going to happen. Quit lookings, because there is no position.. Its been four years, so its time to stop. The other two duds are just as bad.
July 8th, 2007 at 8:39 am
LOL
Hawk-Eye-Cam will be a regularly feature in ‘Premier League’ (soccer league in England), finally some progress!, soccer is so conservative an slow to respond to evolution. We have had Hawk-Eye-Cam in the NFL for how long now, 6 years?
Now I’m talking cameras… Remember the super bowl with the Matrix effect? I think it was our trip to the SB in 2002, but it was definitely the last one on ABC, It was so cool, it’s sad that we have to talk about the past when the subject falls on nice camera features.
RIP Dan Birdwell… thanks for the nice words
July 8th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Oh Man,
If you go to Yahoo sports and click on NFL there is a headline story talkin about the Dolts new head coach Wade Phillips! The reporter ovbiously doesn’t even know who the coach is because he keeps saying in the interview he and teh new coaches. What a bunch of goofs!
Gates is talking too mostly showing how un-excited he is.
July 8th, 2007 at 9:37 am
Well just to say a little nuthin’. All you jerk-off’s who think you know it all don’t know crap
You say this and that about how bad my Raiders are when all you really know is how fast
to jerk your pekers. All you non-members of the only nation in football, quit trying to suck
you own pekers….it’s not big enough.
Eflo-Bleeder of Silver & Black
July 8th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
d-thom! exactly… a kick-butt center like the ones i mentioned above!!! that is why the raiders have set that position as a “lifer” occupation. it’s been the “piston” that drove that raider engine to the most-feared offensive thrust in the nfl. i hope to see one again. hoping this new season molds one.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Militia,
See the title of the post. “VERTICAL stretch”. Are you going to tell me this isn’t some kind of shill for the vertical game? And, he’s also looking for a running back similar to Clem Daniels!! WTF?? Dude, that was 30 years ago! How about a running back similar to Ladanian Tomlison, Larry Johnson? Oh, yeh, here we go: “screw LT, screw Johnson, screw the dolts”. This is what just kills me. Instead of building a team that can compete in today’s league, again, TODAY’S league, not 1975’s league, we’d rather build a classic Raider team and if it wins a whopping total of 2 games, then so be it. Because we’re the Raiders! And, if you criticize our…vertical stretch, YOU’RE NOT A REAL FAN, MAN! It just gets tiresome. Nothing VERTICAL is going to win in today’s league. Stretch? Fine. Two back formation? Fair enough. If it works. If it moves the chains. If we win football games. If not? then it just another retarded chapter of us trying to repeat the glory of the past, resulting in a complete nose dive. And, forcing the deep ball will never work anymore. Every defensive coordinator we face this year will say this to his squad at monday’s practice, “It’s the Raiders. You know they can’t resist going deep. Be ready.”. and, they are ready. They will be ready. We can’t assume they won’t be ready. If we have to throw short passes all game long, ALL SEASON LONG, to move the chains, then so be it. JUST WIN BABY,,,right???
July 8th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Lamont Jordan has to step up the first four games of the season. He has shown flashes of ability. It is almost hard to beleive this was the same guy that had 1500 all purpose yards and 11 td’s in 05.
I think we will see Rhodes and Bush both get about 100 carries this year. I like the versatility that Griffith brings to the backfield. He carried the load a week or two last year for Atlanta when Dunn and Norwood went down.
With the depth and versatility that was added to the roster in the offeseason, the Raiders have a done a good job of improving in a hurry. Last year we really just had Lamont. Fargas is a nice change of pace back, but he struggled once Lamont got hurt. Lamont seems competitive, and with Rhodes and Bush challanging him, I think he could have the type of season he had in 05. 1,000 yards rushing, 500 yards recieving, and 11td’s. it will be hard for him to put up those types of numbers because he was the only option that season. When he dropped a pass, or fumbled the ball, the offense had nobody else to turn to. This year the Raiders have some proven and even intriguing options. Kiffin will not be forced to go with Lamont if he stumbles.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
sick!
right on. 2-back gut-runs, short, deliberate passes and then… deep-schemed vertical passes “over the safety’s head”. garden variety.
July 8th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Its a game of inches Twerp. I remeber the worst team in Raider history going down to San Diego last year and giving the bolts all they could handle. I remember the bolts needing a bail out by the REfs to beat the Raiders in San Diego last year.
That “forward” pass kind of sums up the Chargers. The bolts have too many character issues on their team. They will not win, despite the talent, because they are not too smart. The QB is all right for a rookie, but he still has not been able to drop back and beat people in the passing game. LT is the best player in the league, there is no doubting that, but after that all you have are a bunch brainless muscle.
San Diego is the house that Marty built. Until marty came, the Raiders called that Oakland south. The Raiders will beat San Diego in Oakland south this year because Marty will not be there to keep the focused on not loosing to the lowely Raiders the Way Marty would.
The bolts are a shell of their former selves. I am glad Aj Smith is running that team, because if Marty had his way Drew Brees and Donnie Edwards would still be there. Marty would have won a superbowl last year for the bolts had they kept his QB, but that sums up the Bolts. Just when they build a good team, they do something to mess it up. This year they did a few somethings: Fire Marty, loose Wade Phillips, Loose Cam Cameron, the TE coach is in Clevland, the LB coach is in San Fran. Ted Cotrell was out of Football for a reason. Norv Turner is a weenie. The players know who is in charge: AJ Smith. Aj Smith is like Al Davis without the old days to reminisce about: without the three Super bowls.
July 8th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Art Shells hat why do you hate on Al Davis so much. I don’t always agree with the man. I get frustrated about some of the bone headed moves and decisions he has made, but I rember it is his team. He has won before. He should have never let Gruden Go, but lets be honest, He found and made Gruden in to the star he was. Gruden will be out of a job along with buce Allen if they do not make the playoffs this year.
Al found Sean Payton in 2004 before anyone else was saying the guys name. If you remeber he was the Head caoch for 24 hours before he reconsidered: probably because Parcells( Al’s close friend, but Payton’s mentor) told him that Al still had too much control.
Al had to hand over the enitire operations to land the next great young mind of the NFL. Al had to because there are too many other teams taking the same appraoch has been taking since day one. Teams would rather pay a young coach the minimum and get the most out of them, then pay an expereinced coach 5 million a year for half the effort. Al used to be the only one that thought this way, now everyone is doing it. The Steelers ran off Cowher, Wisenhunt, and Grimm for an unproven 30 something in Tomilin.
As bad as Al is, he is the Reason you are a Raiders fan. He built the team. He hand picked the coaches. He stocked the roster for the past 40 something years.
He has had a bad run for the past couple of years, but you habe to take the good with the bad. Al loves to take gambles. He never stops taking risks. Lately he has busted more than he hit, but that does not mean that he can’t hit again. I think his ability to step back and let someone else run the team shows his willingness to win at all costs. Of course he is splitting up the control between Kiffin, Rob Ryan, Mark Jackson, Snead, and even Amy Trask because he does not want to be caught in the same situation he was in when Gruden and Allen had left him out to dry.
As bad as things have been. The raiders enter 07 with a great young defense. A potential franchise QB with the talent and Ability that only comes around every ten years or so. A player in Ronald Curry that seems poised to be the comeback player of the year. Man I could go on about the potential that the Raiders have to make a run over the next couple of years.
July 8th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Sick of… - is it you twerp???
LT and LJ is welcome to join anytime =) hell even if the Priest returns i’m willing to open my arms.
Kiffin has said that we are going for 40 yards passes max 2 times per quarter…
July 8th, 2007 at 2:38 pm
I haven’t talked about Clem Daniels
July 8th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
RAIDERHOLIC REALITY TIME
2006 statistical comparison of the key personnel of the Faiders and the CHARGERS:
QB
Faiders - Josh McCown - 0.0 QB rating - 0 Yds. - TDs 0
Faiders - JaMarcus Russell… Rookie!
CHARGERS - Phillip Rivers - ‘06 Stats - 92 QB rating - 3,388 - TDs 22
NFL Ave. - QB rating 76 - 1,672 Yds. - 11 TDs
RB
Faiders - Lamont Jordan - 434 Yds. - 3.8 Ave. Rushing TDs 2
CHARGERS - LaDainian Tomlinson - 1,815 Yds. - 5.2 Ave. - Rushing TDs 28
NFL Ave. - 363 Yds. - 4.7 Ave. - Rushing TDs 4
WR/TE
Faiders - WR Mike Williams - 9 Rec. - 99 Yds. - TDs 1
Faiders - TE Courtney Anderson - 25 Rec. - 285 Yds. - TDs 2
CHARGERS - Antonio Gates - 71 Rec. - 924 Yds. - TDs 9
NFL Ave. - 31 Rec. - 443 Yds. - TDS 4
OFFENSIVE LINE
Faiders - 72 sacks allowed!
CHARGERS - 28 sacks allowed
NFL Ave. - 37 sacks allowed
TWERP’S FINAL THOUGHTS
I could cite more stats to prove the obvious, but even you silver and crap diehard Raiderholics get the picture: Your team’s talent level is, well, garbage.
No amount of chest banging or pining for the past “mythical” Oakland/L.A./Oakland/Whatever Raiders can escape the personnel pit dug by The Al and his crew of “yes” men.
Prepare yourselves for many more seasons of pathetic performances and get whooped by the CHARGERS.
July 8th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Raiders Superbowl Victories - 3
Chargers Superbowl Victories - 0
Charger fans seeking attention on Raiders website because nobody else gives a damn about the Chargers(Chokers) - 1
Raider fans willing to even log on to any Chargers blog - 0
July 8th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
twerp!
“…prepare yourself for many more seasons of raider-stick-envy…”
July 8th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Raider O’Reilly asked the pivotal question of Late Bird’s essay that no one here has yet
addressed. That is, what type of O did Kiff run at USC. The chances are strong, if not
gauranteed, that this is the O we will have in Oakland. Hence, this will be the answer, if
not rejection of Late Bird’s plea.
I took the priviledge of watching a good bit of shortened USC game film (i.e. highlights)
From what I can gather (albiet from game highlights) Kiff prodominately ran a lot of strong-side/weak-side formations, some single back formations (prob b/c of Bush’s talents), a
little bit of I-formation (mostly when the game was over to run out the clock) and I saw
one pro-style/split back formation (which was a beauty). All-in-all, 2 backs were in
backfield a lot.
I don’t watch USC football, but from watching this film I have come to realize that the
key to USC’s success is in the versatility of its players (esp. at RB/FB). Defenses were
fu’ked. Who do you monitor? Everyone can make a play. If you listen to what Kiff has
said insofar, you’ll find that this is what he’s trying to replicate in Oakland. At USC he had
RBs/FBs who could run, block and catch. With Oakland he has stocked up on RBs/FBs
who can for the most part do them all, with a one being marginal at best at blocking
(namely LJ).
Without further evidence to the contrary, in the end I think we will see what Bird is
asking for. But probably not in the split back prostyle formation. Instead in the weak-side/strong-side formations. Expect a lot of pocket movement with QB rolling to one side
or the other [this was beautifully executed in the reels as you could see another pocket
forming (with both or one back assisting in blocking in the new pocket and the other
being used as a weapon)]. We may also see some plays where both LJ and DR are on
the field.
& the beauty in that 1 pro-style play I saw was that they placed the RB (R. Bush) and the
FB split side by side in the back field…the defense was looking for run all the way as they
were crowding the line …but USC did not run…instead they sent the FB one side
and Bush ran deep up-field where Lienart delivered the pass over the defense’s head…
they were totally caught flat-footed excepting run all the way….burnt for a huge gain!
July 8th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Twatfan, you can’t talk smack untill you have won something. STUPID IDIOT
GO RAIDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 8th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
I’d just like to add that those wh think that football has changed. It hasn’t the players have changed the game is the same game I’ve been watching for 40 years. The rules have changed a lot in terms what you can do physically to an opponent. But there isn’t a single solitary scheme that’s new in all the years I’ve watched this great game.
There were two teams the St Louis Cardinals and old Kansas City Chiefs that would out razzle any dazzle that these great coaching minds of today could ever come up with. And both those scheme were born out Sid Gilmans old LA chargers and donm’t forget the old Houston Oilers with George Blanda at QB.
Folks I’ve said it a million times and will continue. THe most important thing is the players and the execution that counts scheme’s are just X’s & O’s you need the Billy’s and the Joe’s. That play with confidence and attitude.
When we get THAT, we will win with what ever scheme you chose.
Take for instance the Dallas Cowboy’s under Jimmie Johnson with ol’ Norvell Turner @ OC hhow many championships did they win?. Well we ran that same scheme 2 yrs ago. How many games did we win. Case closed!! No confidence!!! No attitude!!! No Execution!!! and I should add not enough TALENT.
So stop with all the talk about schemes and give me some players who want to win and are willing to pay the price and coaches that know how to lead them. By the way the west coast offense bores me to death. I’ll take SD’s offense over it in a millisecond. Which is essentially the same offense we ran in the 70’s and Cowboy’s won with in the 90’s.
July 9th, 2007 at 5:11 am
Blackholepriest… I simply disagree with you. You can make a mediocre team play good if you have the right plan and execution. Norv perhaps had the plan but the execution just wasn’t there - the same will happen in SD.
To our bestest friend the twerp… You simply wont understand. NO and I say no raider fan will make a statement that 2006 was a great offensive year. So why post the stats. Even Al admitted 2006 was a year of infamy… To you without history knowledge, Queen Elisabeth used that phrase the year all the Royal families either split up or got killed. Furhtermore Winston Churchill used the phrase the first year under the Blitz…
What twerp and Blackholepriest seems to miss is that if you have to chefs almost the same ingredients. You’ll most likely end up with 2 different dishes. So schemes and formations is EVERYTHING - especially how you use’em…
Finally if I make the statement here that the raiders last year was horrific will you please stop posting how bad we were? it doesn’t serve any function ohh btw your stats most likely will change to the worse now that your coaching staff is totally out of sync
July 9th, 2007 at 6:12 am
The style that Kiff ran at USC was a hybrid of both the Gilman and West Coast. He attacks from all angles of the field like Terrapin says. He does use a lot of schemes with 2 backs in the offense, as well as a Tight End (which is why we drafted Miller). He also moves the O-line to attack the D-line on running plays. When LenDale White carried up the middle, the both Tackles would pull behind the Center, and create a HUGE hole up the middle; giving White the room he needed. He also had the Center and Guards pull to the outside of the Tackles when Bush ran to the outside. The line was constantly moving, blocking, and attacking the defense instead of waiting for the defense to come to them. That is going to be different, and something even Chucky didn’t do.
As mentioned too, Kiffin surrounded himself with players that were capable to do different things (i.e.-run, pass, block, catch, etc). Leinart was not afraid to use his body to block on a running play. I expect the same with our QB’s now. He constantly moved the pocket on passing plays. He never worried about armstrength as much as he did with accuracy. The only QB he had that had armstrength and accuracay was Carson Palmer, and look where he is now. That is why I expect J-Russ to have a great NFL career.
I say all of that to say this, we will see the Raiders play a current style of football that will be an improved form of the early Raiders’ teams that played hard, physical football. The O-Line will attack the defense, and the plays will be set to scheme that will always have an open man on the field. It’s not so much a “Power running game” as much as it is a “Power blocking scheme.” That is the scheme style that Kiffin runs. Blocking is the key that runs everything offensively. You can’t have the tough, hardnosed run, without tough, hardnosed blocking. Kiffin makes the blocking hardnosed with his schemes; he puts the blocker in the position to dominate the defense, and open up the offense. That will be the difference.
On a different note, I would suggest that we don’t worry about division rivals on this page. I said it before, it seems to me that the only reason they are on here is because they are scared for this season. That is revealed by how they keep bringing up the past few seasons. But let’s look at the facts. Which 2 team has made the AFC Championship and the Superbowl more times this decade, other than the Patriots? I’ll give you a hint, one is the Colts; and the other is a team from the AFC West, that has silver in their uni’s.
July 9th, 2007 at 7:59 am
I’m not missin’ any point. Let’s look at the New England Patriots you take away Tom Brady and see where that scheme gets ya’. What did the Dolphins do after Dan Marino. The 49ers haven’t run the the west coast since Mooch left. THey are running same offense we ran 2 yrs ago.
Give me Playmakers and PLAYCALLERS and I’ll make any scheme work.
Norv Turner may be a lousy Head Coach and can’t motivate a fox to eat chicken but that offense is being ran all over the league.
Scheme are important but only but nearly as much as Talent and playcaller. Besides most all playbooks are probably 80% the same the difference is in the terminology.
And I thought I made it clear that EXECUTION is key in what ever you want to do. I just get tired of this whole idea that today’s game is better or different than what I saw 40 yrs ago , because I know that it’s not.
Just give a signal caller who knows how to attack a defense and some talent to do it with and you can spend all day talking about schemes. Because I know what wins ballgames PLAYERS!!!
Not only that you put together your grand scheme with average talent and I’l take some great players a vanilla scheme on defense shut you out. IT”S CALLED FOOTBALL!!! You all think Bill Belichick runs this ellaborate scheme. Well what he really does keep it simple and get good footbal players that want to play hard. That’s why he can take all these players plug them in and get good to great results because it’s not complicated but he does what works!
July 9th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Yeah but now we are living in a world with salary cap, so its hard to get brilliant players.
And still, schemes and formation is NOT the same. Spilt backs is NOT a old formation. It’s used in some of the most modern offenses. Blackholepriest. I give you we need better players. But we have to face facts and that’s, that we have the team that we have and you shouldn’t change more than 12 starting spots. I give you a bunch of players should be cut this and next year, but I don’t understand what you are advocating for. YES we all want better players? but what’s your solution? You say you want better player, how? we are cap-strapped, the draft is over so how will get those playmakers?
I’m talking about what we have in stock and how we can use it. For the first time we have several RB’s with catching abilities, a TE that can block and receive furthermore we have a FB that can block, receive and run. This means that the split back formation (with a modern cut-block SCHEME) will be advantageous for us. Again a formation will be a quick way to change our outcome, where as change our roster completely to playmakers will take some time…
July 9th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Nate….your insight is the kind thats needed in Raiderland…anyone who knows USC football has the inside edge in determining the make-up of our O.
What you commented on is exactly what I saw in the film. USC’s O is a blocking O - everyone blocked even Lienhart. What I found amazing from watching the film is how many players were in on the highlights. It seemed like every player at every skilled position had a highlight. USC’s O was an attacking/moving O. With the add’l light you have shined now I see why Kiff went after Cable. I see why when Kiff first came here he commented that our players were not versatile (only specialist) and that was something he wanted to change. I see why we have begun to stock up on versatile RBs/FBs/WRs. These are exciting times in Raiderland…my hope is that Kiff can trully replicate USC’s powerfull offense & make it successful in the NFL.
July 9th, 2007 at 8:52 am
Nate and Terrapin.
Thanks for the go-through… It was good. Though there is a big difference in how you’ll attack a defense in college or how you do it in the pros
July 9th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Regarding the split back system, I’ll agree that Marcus lobbied for MORE “I” formation, but won’t agree that he’s why the Raiders use of it tailed off. Funny this article came out, cause I was watching a game from ‘93 this weekend, and noticed how much more split back formations we used even then. So to me it didn’t die in early 80’s with Marcus, it died when Art Shell and B&B, Part I left.
The league as a whole, as someone alluded to has gone away from this formation for a multitude of reasons.
First off, it limits the use of your best back (tailback) because he can only get a lead blocker in one direction. In other words if say Marcus Allen is lined up on the left side of the split, only on long developing plays to the right, will he get a lead blocker. Running to the left in this alignment allows only for quick hitting dives, maybe a quick pitch, but again, no lead blocker.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Second, it calls for two backs that are good at everything (blocking, catching and running…hard, no speed only guys) as the formation dictates the need for the backs to do all of the above. This is all well and good, sometimes, but not all the time. Take a Griffith for instance. Yeah, he can catch out of the back-field, and maybe even pound the rock a little, but his specialty is as the lead blocker, opening holes, planting linebackers on their can. From the split formation (lined up on the right, for instance) he could only do this running right. Pitch left, and he’s not doing anything. Run him on a sweep left, and you’ve got Lamont Jordan or Dominic Rhodes blocking for him, and what sense would that make?
July 9th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Third, regarding these slow developing sweep and counter plays, defenses are too fast in today’s game for these plays to be consistently successful. Sure every now and then you can block one up right, and it can go for a good gain, but play in and play out, the formation just isn’t very flexible to allow for highlighting your talent’s strengths. In an age of “specialists” the formation isn’t the best for creating mismatches.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:04 am
Damn, moderation…coming through in pieces.
Nice points La Milicia…
July 9th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Third, regarding these slow developing sweep and counter plays, defenses are too fast in today’s game for these plays to be consistently successful. Sure every now and then you can block one up right, and it can go for a good gain, but play in and play out, the formation just isn’t very flexible to allow for highlighting your talent’s strengths. In an age of “specialists” the formation isn’t the best for creating mismatches.
No question, the formation could stand to be used more, but not as the base formation that it once was.
Oh…and the ever famous “17-BOB TRE-O” was primarily run out of split…while Marcus Allen was there.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:06 am
No question, the formation could stand to be used more, but not as the base formation that it once was.
Oh…and the ever famous “17-BOB TRE-O” was primarily run out of split…while Marcus Allen was there
July 9th, 2007 at 9:12 am
Nate & Terrapin…thanks for the insights on what the USC Offense has been running the past few years because that is really what the Raiders O will look like under Kiffin, with a few tweaks here and there. A couple of things I would like to add; if you remember Greg Knapp’s work as O coordinator in SF you would have seen a similar type offense that I believe USC favored. Lot of roll-outs with Garcia and moving pockets, combo west coast offense with power blocking schemes, do-everything RB/FB’s who can all block, catch, run. I believe that is why Kiffin sought out Knapp right away because Knapp had success at a pro level with the same type of offense. They actually played the 2003 NFC wildcard game (SF beat NYG) a few weeks ago on NFL Network and these were some of the things I was looking for. A bonus was seeing Newberry totally defend one of his teammates and slamming a couple of defenders in a nice sideline scuffle…that is what the Raiders need in there O-line.
Another point I wanted to bring up is the mobile pocket the Raiders will be using. Mike Mayock pointed out that JRussell was one of the most accurate QB’s he had ever seen when throwing on the move. That ability, along with that gun of an arm, could be lethal in a system like Kiffin’s. That is why i don’t buy any of the stuff I hear about the Raiders wanting BQuinn…it’s a know concern that Quinn has accuracy problems, especially on the move.
July 9th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
RIP Dan Dirdwell, THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!
Since 64′ and that’s the way it happened. That’s why I couldn’t get into Gruden. His every play call was in the 5 yd range. The Saftey never had to worry about behind him. all he had to do was stay in the box.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
You let the defense cheat if they don’t have to play the whole field.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
when we beat the dolts twice this year we will no longer have to put up with what the twat is trying to queef out everyday. but until then fellow brotherens……..put a clip on your nose and spray some lysol for that fowl twat smell…….
July 9th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
La Milicia Negra, once again THERE IS NOTHING MODERN about cut blocks or split backs it’s been around since I’ve been watching football. The 49ers’ in the 80’s were doing both and Walsh brought it from Cincinati under Paul Brown.
Zone blocking years ago was called the “buddy system”. that’s when I learned about it!!
And PLEASE!!! I am not saying SCHEME doesn’t matter. I’ve seen schemes that you wouldn’t recognize that they were American Football.
But I believe in coaching talent, which means getting the best out of each player and gettingb him to compete at levels he didn’t know were in him. AND THAT HAS VERY LITTLE TO DO with SCHEME!!. But a heck of a lot to do with technigue actually teaching them how to play football.
And I know we have talent. I think we’re as talented a team as there is contrary to popular beliefs, it’s just going to take time for the cream to rise to the top is all. And to continue to biuld where there’s need.
July 9th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
dan the man!!!
i KNEW it was you from the title
you ARE more of a traditionalist than i
i really do prefer power I
but your argument is fascinating
thanks, friend, cliffy
July 9th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
The Raiders are not that broke. I like the comments on 2 back I formation lines etc. It’s all about coaching. The Pats are a perfect example they have a great quarterback but the team is coached up. I have been a Raiders fan my whole life and let me tell you something. This coach knows what he is doing. I loved Art Shell but you don’t hire a guy out of football for that long to be your offensive coordinator. They had no clue what they where doing in week one and week 16. This Kiffin is a student of the game he knows more than Chucky did when he came to Oakland. This will be night and day in terms of this year and last. Go Raiders
July 9th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
a strong argument AGAINST I formation is:
how really really hard it is to pass out of I
your best player (marcus) is too deep to release
to protect he must step forward, then redirect
SPLIT BACKS is a far superior pass formation
SPLIT BACKS earns its living on the change up between
power and counter
clarence davis blocked for VE on a lot more plays than just sweeps to his side
fake here, give there
vs in-your-face-power: VE following CD over Buehler, over Dalby
SPLIT BACKS as the wise commentators on this thread recognize
requires great versatility from both guys
inside run, outside run, block, receive
run block, pass block
(they all said hewritt dixon was a great pass blocker, for instance)
(of course, CD’s greatest trait was lead blocking)
SPLIT BACKS unlike I
are ideally situated to pass protect
also to release
ANY PASS OUT OF I IS A TRICK PLAY!!!
thanks, all
cliff
July 9th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
and, yes
marcus’ reverse field TD vs WS in XVIII came from Split Backs
as did kenny king’s 80 yard TD catch vs PH in XV
indeed, BOTH pete banaszak’s ONE YARD td’s in XI
GOAL LINE FORMATION, mind you
BOTH pete’s 1 yarders—Split Backs
the Raiders ran exclusive Split Backs pre 85, Marcus’ MVP Year
thanks, again, cliff
July 10th, 2007 at 4:56 am
La Militia Negra, I think Kiff knows that there is a difference between college and the pro’s. So did Norm Chow, so does Pete Caroll, and Charlie Weiss. Now Pete may not have had a great NFL Career as a HC, but he did have successful years as a Coordinator. He went to the NCAA and has great success. Charlie Weiss had a great career as a Coordinator to, and did the same as Caroll. I think he will have good success with Notre Dame.
My point being that Kiffin understands this, he was mentored by 3 strong people. Let me run down that list:
1. Monty Kiffin-his dad, Defensive Coordinator for the Bucs. I like this mentorship the best, because in order to understand how to run an offense, you have to understand how a defense operates. Lane learned from one of the best defensive minds in modern day football, his dad Monty Kiffin.
2. Norm Chow-was Chow’s assistant at USC, preferred him over Sarkisian to run the USC Offense, but Pete wanted Sark in there, so they doubled. Chow is having great success in Tennessee at running a similar offense that he did at USC. Kiffin’s offense is a little more cutthroat aggressive than Chow’s. But the difference is in the scheming, and people say that Kiffin is a better schemer than Chow.
3. Pete Caroll-Pete is a good coach. He knows how to compete, and coaches from a standpoint of making people relax and think about life while being brutal. We saw something similar with Kiffin in the OTA’s. He made the team compete, but at the same time, the majority of the players made comments how fun it was just to compete.
I think he’ll do better than expected.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:16 am
Terrapin,
Belated thanks for going through that film. I’m mostly on dial-up, and I do have a job, so… Given waht little I remember from the games I saw the last three years, you are right. Nice work, friend and colleague.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:19 am
Nate,
Thanks for the insight, gestalt shift. Yes, blocking. I see what you say. And I can just imagine the look on the face of the Will on some team when Russell cracks back to block the weakside pursuit. Oh, man, what a pretty picture that will be.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:23 am
KoolKell,
Back at you, bror. Those who know me know how hard it was for me to watch Chuckie’s O. Exactly, let defenses cheat, and they will. If you can’t make them pay within the context of your O, you’re screwed and they will win. Simple as that, which is why the vertical stretch is so critical. It is precisely BECAUSE of the speed of modern Ds that you must make them defend the entire width and depth of the field. Given them a box nine yards deep from sideline to sideline, you will not get much done. With a defender on the QB at the top of so many drops last year, that was the problem with that O, too.
July 10th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Blackholepriest,
I have been a teacher at the elementary, middle, and high school levels, and college, and I could not agree with you more on the importance of coaching, making sure that your guys (or girls, as the case may be, but not here) know and execute the fundamentals. There’s a reason they still teach this stuff, and that is because it reliably works. I played high school ball with a 160 pound kid at offensive center. One playoff game, he faced off a nose tackle going 230. Due to superior fundamentals (mainly firing off the ball, staying low, and driving his guy either left or right rather than straight back) he rarely had or needed help that day, and the boys on that side of the ball ran for over 200.
Scheme in football, though, I think is analogous to teaching method. Something about how you go about what you do has to produce in them a buy-in, the confidence that as you believe in them they also believe that you can help them. Jerry Porter is, on this team, the example par excellance of the importance of scheme.
Thanks for your thoughts, bror. Don’t agree with all of them, but I have learned.
July 10th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Professor Eyepatch,
Cliff, my friend, thank you for the timeless phrase: ANY PASS OUT OF I IS A TRICK PLAY!!!I’m gonna use that one.
Your knowledge of history has helped to catalyze my own views on the I vs. split backs. I’m not calling for it all the time or even the base formation, but I would like to see it 25% to 40% of the time. It’s an opportunity to use the weapons we have while still playing real smash-mouth, punishing football. It may look to the casual viewer like a Chuckie “formation and personnel you to death” scheme (another phrase I stole from you), but it will be for the purpose Kiffin articulated in his introductory press conference of “putting playmakers in a position to make plays” rather than simple smoke and mirrors.
Peace.
July 10th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
RIP Dan,
I’d like to see a TV Camera close up of the guy who craps his pants when J-Russ lays a block on him from the weakside! The pretty picture will be on Raiders.com, with J-Russ standing over the guy who’s on his back with his legs in the air like a dead animal; and a big fat brown spot leaking through his uni.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
[...] Oakland Raiders: They’re using the same template as the 2007 Minnesota Vikings (i.e. a lack of a passing game can be overshadowed by an abundance of talented running backs). I don’t think Darren McFadden will be as dominant as Adrian Peterson but he will definitely come up large. Al Davis also took a gamble on a pair of physically gifted wide receivers ( Chaz Schilens and Arman Shields) to maintain the perceived threat of the Vertical Stretch. [...]