how and why the Raiders will make the playoffs

thanks for the lovefest, guys. but you should know that in real life i'm actually really a dick.
Maybe you and Schneed are like...opposite soul mates?

True Matt we did have other problems but unless JC has contracted a sudden case of the Leaders then he won't bring much of a change in Oakland. They have talent but who is the leader of that team ? IMO the QB needs to be the leader of the offense if not the team. I think that Jason's leadership was never a strong suit. All that lead by example crap is for the other guys, the QB has to be the guy. He has to make the other 10 guys in that huddle believe that they can accomplish whatever task they are up against. If he finds a way to call his own protections, become more vocal at the line, and actually fortifies himself as the guy then Oakland could be heading up the charts. Many of you have called me out for my hatred of JC but it wasn't him, but his game. He can't sit and crave the love of his Front Office, Coaches, Fans, he has to make them understand that they must love him because he is what they want him to be. He never did that here which is why he is gone. If anyone wonders why I said leader so much, and that he lacked leadership skills then I'll say that I wouldn't have if JC's former teammates didn't express the how much it lacked before Donovan got here.

Then again, he still needs to win the QB job for all of that to matter right ? One more thing, dude are you Jason Campbell's cousin or something ?

Be easy and Hail To The Redskins !!!

Since this is a skins forum, let's look back at the SB winning qbs of Gibbs. Only 1 was a vocal leader, Joe T. Otherwise, Rypien & D. Williams were both guys that led by example.

If a coach has a strong personality & there is a sense of discipline & unity on a team, I don't think on field leaders have to be constant spokesmen. That's one of many reasons that I wished JC could've stayed & played for Shanahan. I believe Shanahan would've given him the kind of 'mandate' to lead that he needed, since he doesn't appear to be a vocal leader.

In this sense, under a coach like Shanahan (or Gibbs), the qb becomes the voice of the coach & doesn't have to shout the message, just convey it.

Maybe you and Schneed are like...opposite soul mates?


Hmmm....I was going to say TTE.

Really enjoyed your article on the Good News-Bad News-Mcnabb. I agree with alot of the assessments for the most part.

Not ready for the whole :grouphug: thing....but I find the subject matter of your articles interesting and informative. :thumb:

Since this is a skins forum, let's look back at the SB winning qbs of Gibbs. Only 1 was a vocal leader, Joe T. Otherwise, Rypien & D. Williams were both guys that led by example.

If a coach has a strong personality & there is a sense of discipline & unity on a team, I don't think on field leaders have to be constant spokesmen. That's one of many reasons that I wished JC could've stayed & played for Shanahan. I believe Shanahan would've given him the kind of 'mandate' to lead that he needed, since he doesn't appear to be a vocal leader.

In this sense, under a coach like Shanahan (or Gibbs), the qb becomes the voice of the coach & doesn't have to shout the message, just convey it.

You are right IF you have a coach that is your leader, or vocal then you don't HAVE to be but why can't you lead your team. I'm going to try my best to keep this on topic as it relates to the Raiders. Now, you wish that Shanny would've kept JC but he didn't. Do you know why JC ended up in Oakland ? Because the tape doesn't lie. Period, Point, Blank. The man doesn't quite exude Franchise guy. It isn't about the line or the receivers it's the tape on him. His slow decision making, his reluctance to learn and call his line protections, his reluctance to take charge of the offense. That is why. I can't stand how we as Redskins fans always say well if we have a line then we can have anyone back there. It is simply not true.

As a QB you have to have something uncanny about you that get's you over that hump. People say that Rothlesberger is shit but he makes a rack of money and do you know why ? Because when the game is on the line you know that you know that you have a chance. Until JC can find that IT Factor Fairyand show the higher ups that he gives you that he will be a second tier QB. For all the "executives" and "unnamed sources" that say how good he is NO ONE WANTED HIM. Let me repeat,.... NO ONE WANTED HIM. It wasn't the "horrible line that he had", it wasn't the "running back that has lost it", or the "Wide Receivers that can't get it done",.. it was him. The QB that doesn't get the ball out fast enough, or the QB that doesn't have one bit of pocket presence, and who is clearly missing that IT factor.

As I said before, if he gets that then he can be more that a QB with pretty good stats once the game is over but really didn't do much for you.

If anyone would like to argue JC's lack of leadership then as I said before, why is it that Donovan brought what was NEEDED so badly ? Remember the players said this, not just me. Once he gets all of that down then IF he wins the job in Oakland then they might be able to hold down one of the top spots in the AFC. Til then, enjoy your 8-8 ceiling Oakland.

On the raiders - skins theme, I watched the "30 for 30" movie the other night by ICe Cube, "Straight Outta LA." It was awesome, except for the clips of the LA Raiders killing us in the super bowl!

They showed an interview w/Dexter Manley from back then. Of course, they had to show M. Allen & his famous run on us. That was the apex for the LA raiders, they went hollywood after that, became a ghettoized fan base & mediocre at best for the rest of the 80s.

Interestingly, of the clips they showed about the raiders demise, they had a Raiders - Skins game in LA w/Jay Schroeder throwing a pick 6 to Martin Mayhew. The highlight was also accompanied by Willie Gault saying the raiders didn't have a great qb then. That they showed that game was fitting, since we traded Schroeder to them for the best LT in the game, Jim Lachey. Lachey went on to win a super bowl w/Joe Gibbs & D. Williams. Schroeder continued his downward slide w/the raiders. Kind of funny to look at that w/the recent JC trade having gone down.

Another funny thing in the movie were the tapes of Shanahan being introduced as head coach in 88 I believe. Rod Martin, raiders LB from the super bowl team, said that Shanahan wanted to make them a finesse team and "took the fun out" of football for him. Shanahan's & Al Davis' stormy relationship has always been well known in the press. Yet, w/Bruce Allen here, we have a former raiders gm who obviously can make a deal w/Al Davis et al.

On the raiders making the playoffs this year; I'd say they're about in the same boat we are. It will take some good fortune & overachieving to get there.

I've watched almost all of the 30-for-30s, but deliberately skipped this one because I knew, as did everyone I imagine, that the Redskins-Raiders SB would be profiled, arguably the most disappointing loss in the history of the franchise. Since then, my Raider hatred has been right on par with my Cowboy hatred. If we are actually going to post on this board evaluations of how the Raiders are going to fare going forward, I'd much prefer that the title read instead "How and why the Raiders will continue to suck."

thanks for the lovefest, guys. but you should know that in real life i'm actually really a dick.

:lol:

This is definitely sig worthy. LOL.

You are right IF you have a coach that is your leader, or vocal then you don't HAVE to be but why can't you lead your team. I'm going to try my best to keep this on topic as it relates to the Raiders. Now, you wish that Shanny would've kept JC but he didn't. Do you know why JC ended up in Oakland ? Because the tape doesn't lie. Period, Point, Blank. The man doesn't quite exude Franchise guy. It isn't about the line or the receivers it's the tape on him. His slow decision making, his reluctance to learn and call his line protections, his reluctance to take charge of the offense. That is why. I can't stand how we as Redskins fans always say well if we have a line then we can have anyone back there. It is simply not true.

As a QB you have to have something uncanny about you that get's you over that hump. People say that Rothlesberger is shit but he makes a rack of money and do you know why ? Because when the game is on the line you know that you know that you have a chance. Until JC can find that IT Factor Fairyand show the higher ups that he gives you that he will be a second tier QB. For all the "executives" and "unnamed sources" that say how good he is NO ONE WANTED HIM. Let me repeat,.... NO ONE WANTED HIM. It wasn't the "horrible line that he had", it wasn't the "running back that has lost it", or the "Wide Receivers that can't get it done",.. it was him. The QB that doesn't get the ball out fast enough, or the QB that doesn't have one bit of pocket presence, and who is clearly missing that IT factor.

As I said before, if he gets that then he can be more that a QB with pretty good stats once the game is over but really didn't do much for you.

If anyone would like to argue JC's lack of leadership then as I said before, why is it that Donovan brought what was NEEDED so badly ? Remember the players said this, not just me. Once he gets all of that down then IF he wins the job in Oakland then they might be able to hold down one of the top spots in the AFC. Til then, enjoy your 8-8 ceiling Oakland.I think you'd be excellent on secondary station talk radio someday. You fit all the qualifications:


Love to hear yourself talk
Can fill up many hours without much substance
Can tie any concept back into a single, unrelated hot button topic
Notoriously prone to ridiculous unfalsifiable assertions
Even those who want nothing to do with you can't seem to ignore you
Ability to fit facts to your arguments eliminates the need to fit your arguments to the facts

And: it pays pretty well. So you've got it made.

I think you'd be excellent on secondary station talk radio someday. You fit all the qualifications:


Love to hear yourself talk
Can fill up many hours without much substance
Can tie any concept back into a single, unrelated hot button topic
Notoriously prone to ridiculous unfalsifiable assertions
Even those who want nothing to do with you can't seem to ignore you
Ability to fit facts to your arguments eliminates the need to fit your arguments to the facts
And: it pays pretty well. So you've got it made.

Well I guess I'd be hated as well. Disagree as you may. I see his play one way, you see it another. IF he does all of those things then I think that he can be a very good Qb in this league, you may feel that he has it down already. Prove me wrong and I'll admit that I am. You can't. That's all that it is. The proof is in the pudding GTripp. He is pretty good, but pretty good isn't going to cut it if he wants to excell. He has young receivers which was his problem here, won't have the best O-Line in the league which was his problem here, and a fan base that has a short fuse which was a problem here. And best believe if he starts they will be firing their Offensive Coordinator within 2 years. You tell me how he can take the game that he had here, insert that in Oakland with the team, coaching staff, Front Office, Owner, whatever disadvantages that he had here that may be similar to what he "dealt with" here and have a higher ceiling than 8-8.

And as sarcastic as you may have been, I would love to be on the radio, I'd be able to spread my version of the truth to the masses !

And to hear more opinions such as this as well as others click on the link below !

wow, this thread went from mocked and locked to 4 pages and 600+ views. it's like Vince Young.