Skip to main content

Raiders' Super Bowl hopes

Welcome back! Believe it or not, in almost a year and a half, this is HPS' 100th post. That blows my mind, because it seems like every few weeks I apologize to you two for never writing, but I've written more than once a week.

The glorious NFL season is nearly upon us-the Broncos' preseason opener is tomorrow night. I've always wanted to write one of those huge Bill Simmons-type previews that talks about every team, but I'm too lazy to write it and you're too lazy to read it. Instead we'll start with a tour through the AFC West and see how we feel. Today's subject: the Oakland Raiders.

Last year: The Raiders finished with a 4-12 regular-season record. As a result, they did not appear in the playoffs.

The big change: The return of Art Shell as head coach. Shell led the Raiders to a 54-38 record from 1989 to 1994 (I should probably mention that I lifted that stat and almost all others from ESPN.com.). The former offensive lineman is a gigantic improvement over last year's coach, the laughable Norv Turner.

Shell's not just any former player-he's a Hall-of-Fame offensive lineman. That's important because any improvement in the play of Oakland's offensive line will be huge. On a positive note, the Oakland line has as much room to improve as any in the entire league.

They stockpile bad passers: The Raiders sure like NFC South washouts at quarterback, signing talented ex-Saint Aaron Brooks to replace the gashed Kerry Collins. Like Collins, Brooks has a strong arm and can throw the deep ball. Like Collins, he doesn't waste time obsessing over which team catches those deep passes. Brooks is mobile and was accurate in his early days, but has made little improvement as his career has gone on.

The offense: The Raiders nevertheless have to get something out of Brooks, as neither Andrew Walter nor the Marquis de Tuiasosopo is ready to contribute. (Tuiasosopo will clearly never become ready.) Brooks has a pretty solid supporting cast for a team that lost a dozen games-Randy Moss can still be the league's premier deep threat, and runner LaMont Jordan should have a bounce-back season if the passing attack can keep defenses guessing.

On the other hand, the line could be horrible again, and the dropoff from Moss to the team's No. 2 receiver is big, especially if Jerry Porter is traded. Expect inconsistency all season long.

The defense: The Raiders surrendered more than 2,000 yards rushing and a passer rating greater than 90 to opposing teams last year. In other words, at least the defense was consistent. Oakland picked former Texas safety Michael Huff in the draft, but they need help all over the field. And yes, Warren Sapp is still, technically, on the team.

Greatest power forward of all-time: will kick.

Outlook: 4-12 is really bad and the Raiders should win more games this year. But they have way too many question marks to compete for the playoffs. I expect six or seven wins from this team.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

And now that it’s gone, it’s like it wasn’t there at all

I never thought this blog would last longer than Jay Cutler's career with the Denver Broncos. He was a talented young prospect so good that the Broncos, a powerhouse organization only one game removed from the Super Bowl the season before, traded up to get him—or, in other words, a player whose upside was so huge, the team sacrificed its present to get his future. And now? He's gone . How did it come to this? * * * Often I'll play devil's advocate with a move like this; you know, I'll try and explain how it makes sense from the other side of the table. Today, during the most disastrous Broncos offseason in memory—and the draft hasn't even happened yet, so settle in—I just don't have it in me. I don't think move is really defensible from a football standpoint. But what the heck: as the article above says, the Broncos are sending Cutler and a fifth-round draft pick this month to the Chicago Bears for quarterback Kyle Orton, Chicago's first-rounder in t...

Five mini-columns

In this in-between time at the start of football and late-but-not-that-late in the everlasting baseball season, there's not any one topic that stands out, so I thought I'd give you my well thought out opinions on five things in sports (originally ten, but I let No. 3 run so long that I thought I'd cut it short (having now finished this, I realize the word short is out of place here)). This probably means I'll have nothing to write about for weeks, so enjoy. Keep in mind that a) I came up with this list at 2 a.m. this morning (I couldn't sleep and I'm not kidding; you have no idea the kind of pressure that comes with running this website) and b) I'm still not making any money off this, so if it makes no sense, blame yourself (which, interestingly enough, also makes no sense). And we're off! 1) Maurice Clarett vs. Ohio State: Before you skip down to No. 2, which I would certainly do in your position, hear me out. There is actually a little timeliness to t...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...