Why The Raiders Should Be Encouraged And The Chargers Discouraged

There are several possible explanations to the Raiders and Chargers game last night.

1) The Chargers are not as good as people thought

2) The Raiders will be better than people thought

3) The Chargers were “rusty,” but will build speed

4) The Raiders played impressively and will iron-out the mistakes through the season

Of course, as a Raider fan, I’m inclined to believe that the Raiders will be better than people thought.  Meanwhile, San Diego coach Norv Turner made a comment (about injuries) that will likely reflect the opinions of San Diego apologists that the game “probably isn’t as bad as it looks.”

Turner made that remark in regards to the apparently high-number of injuries suffered by San Diego, in what may have been a Pyrrhic win for the Chargers. 

However, any truly objective person that watched the game would know that San Diego looked awful, while the Raiders looked impressive for a team that some had remarked after the Seymour trade was still on the, “decline.”

Personally, I think the Raiders shocked the NFL world by turning in an impressive performance, despite technically losing.  The Raiders outplayed the Chargers physically, and dominated statistically for most of the game.

This performance came after the drama of the Richard Seymour trade, in which many speculated was a *desperation* move by Al Davis, but in fact appeared to be a home-run move by Davis.

Overall, anyone that watched that game would say that Oakland outplayed San Diego, but that San Diego won a game they should not have with a few timely big-plays on special teams by Darren Sproles to set-up points for San Diego.

Defensively:

The Raiders smothered the Chargers running-attack when Richard Seymour played, but would allow timely plays to LT and Sproles near the end of the game.

The Raiders defensive-line played very physical, smash-mouth type football, with new addition Seymour, which sidelined ProBowl center Nick Hardwick and rookie guard Louis Vasquez.

Strangely, Seymour’s in-game stats disappeared from Sportsline.com but not the rapid reports.  Yet, the man everyone thought did not want to play in Oakland, answered those blow-hards with two sacks and six tackles in his debut with Oakland, after only two days with the team (even if those same critics are trying to hide the truth).

Defensive backs Chris Johnson and sophomore, Tyvon Branch, also had a big-game, which we believe is a mark of future success.  Much maligned former first-round pick, safety Michael Huff, would recover a fumble and intercept Rivers, which could indicate more starting time for Huff in the future.

Offensively:

The Raiders ran the ball effectively in the first half, but veered away from that in the second half, as the Raiders attempted more passes to their rookie wide receivers, and few high-percentage passes to the running-backs and tight-ends.

Eventually, one attempt paid off with a 57-yard touchdown to Louis Murphy on 4-15 for a go-ahead score and a lead that didn’t last.  Murphy also had a touchdown overturned at the end of the first half, which even the analysts thought should have been a touchdown.

Murphy’s performance was encouraging, as the Raiders will need a wide receiver to step-up in order for JaMarcus Russell to continue to progress.

Though Russell struggled with hash passes, the offensive-line kept him clean, (aside from one sack near the end), and gave Russell plenty of time.  That is encouraging, as Russell will benefit from protection that held-up against a much heralded San Diego front seven.

The Raiders would commit few penalties throughout the game, which was also encouraging, when you know that penalties had plagued the previous coaches, Lane Kiffin, Art Shell, Norv Turner, and Bill Callahan.

Overall:

Considering that the Raiders started two rookie receivers and tried too hard to incorporate them into the offense, even though Louis Murphy came through, I think the Raiders will be better than people thought. 

The reason being is that I think the Raiders will either commit to the run and high-percentage passes, or the passing-game will develop as the season goes along.

The offense stalled in the third quarter, when the Raiders had several 3 and outs after incomplete passes to wide-receivers.

Offensively, the Raiders should stick with high-percentage passes to the running-backs and tight ends.  Tight end Zach Miller seemed to catch every pass thrown to him, while running back Darren McFadden is dangerous in space.

It might not be fancy, but the way the Raiders played defense with Richard Seymour was encouraging. The high-percentage passes, and even some reverses to the speedy wide receivers should be the primary offense, with occasional shots down field.

And if anyone in the Oakland organization is reading this, don’t get cocky PLEASE or believe that you were robbed (which you were), because the best way to prove that you were is to stay focused and WIN the next game.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Fear and Loathing After 9/11: In Dark Times, People Turn to Sports

(This story is intended to be an inspirational tale)

Has it been eight years already?

I realize that many of my articles have a tendency to be a form of gonzo history, in which I insert myself into the bigger picture of history.

That might be because my AP History teacher (as a senior in 2001) would always tell me to see, “the forest from the trees.”  Later that year, I could not help but notice a single dead tree within a forest along Old San Jose Road through the Santa Cruz Mountains.

I was in New York on September 1, 2001, which is when I took the included picture from the Liberty Island Ferry, a day that fundamentally shaped my outlook and actions on the future, when I was still coming of age at 18.  It is also why I deferred from moving to NYC, and instead resolved to blogging.

While I have made myself a thorn in the side of some, it is only because I am an incorrigible asker of big questions, though I only do so to improve others, not denigrate.  Yet, their response would be, “well, who are you to question me?”  Guess what?  I am an American, that’s who.

(By the way, I am not trying to equate myself with Hunter S. Thompson, I merely boosted the term “Fear and Loathing,” because I think it makes this article universally understandable.  I prefer to focus on discovery, free thought, and free-association more than *originality* and rigid rules of form, when it comes to blogging.  I write that knowing that I have become *rat-poison* to the “rats” in the corporate media).

 

V for Victory

The bigger picture is just the nature of blogging as media.  Pros would like to assume that bloggers are nut-jobs, cranks, and trolls, when the corporate media has a share of their own with people like Jay Mariotti and Pete Prisco. I blog for the art of argument, fiction, and to see the big picture from legitimate news sources (AP, BBC, NYT, WSJ, WP, NPR, Newsweek, Time, and occasionally other sources).

I specify legitimate sources, because there are bloggers that conjure some odd things. 

For instance, one blogger has surmised that there must be a conspiracy for if you divide 9/11 then the answer is the irrational number 0.81818181 (infinity).  Thus, if you consider that the eighth letter of the alphabet is H and that the first letter is A, then 9/11 = hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha (infinity).

Some use blogging in order to assemble the news over the course of time, in order to show the big picture, which has a tendency to fall by the wayside in the mainstream media that must give priority to ratings and the news of the day, not how the news of the day relates to the news of yesterday.

At times, it does start to resemble the quixotic thought process of John Nash in A Beautiful Mind (2001). I realize that a statement like that would make people wonder if blogging is like playing with fire, and that it could lead a person to have imaginary friends (and enemies) and live in a make believe world.

So in my abstract defense of a hypothetical offense, I must say that I do have a life outside of blogging.  I go to clubs, I dance, and I have recently returned to school after a long battle with medical conditions.

 

Remember, Remember The 10th of September

People might scoff at the idea that I would have medical conditions, because I am in above-average shape. I was not always that way. I used to be a fat schlub, nearsighted and with breathing problems and chronic infections, amongst other things.

I figured, “Why lose weight, I’ll still be nearsighted?”  September 11, 2001 however, motivated me to improve.  Why?

I realized that I had dissipated as a teen, and that September 11 (three months after I graduated) was a wake-up call that I had taken things for granted.  That, at any moment, someone could kill you or me for a reason that did not matter, because you or I would be dead regardless of the reason.

Thus, I started doing push-ups between video game levels, between commercials, and eventually, preferred the exercise. After a while, I developed an inner critic that went from the voice of a generic drill sergeant to Simon Cowell.

Some people wonder if the desire to lose weight is just running from your demons, rather than addressing them directly. I was just running from an inner voice that sounded like Cowell and called me a “lousy maggot!”  (I think I watched Full Metal Jacket too much…or not enough).

I guarantee though that if Simon Cowell made a motivational DVD of Cowell-isms, it would create better artists than the Randy Jackson and Paula Abdul DVD.

Ultimately, I would develop cataracts, and thanks to my insurance through The Home Depot, I was able to pay for the surgery that not only corrected the cataracts, but changed my vision so that I no longer wear glasses (except readers). The same insurance also repaired the conditions that I had developed as a teen.

(I have vented about employees of The Home Depot in previous blogs, but at the same time, if it was not for the hard-work I put in at HD stores in Watsonville and Liberty Lake, I would not have rectified those conditions.  I am eternally grateful for the time I had there).

 

All in all, after September 11, I broke myself down and then built myself up

That is because sports are meant to inspire people to do great things, not resolve to be only a vicarious spectator.

Some people would like to believe that the only place to do great things is in sports, because that is the only place that “everyone” will care about it.

You can do great things within your communities and people will care, despite what Rudy Giuliani and Sarah “They Call Me Hockey Mom” Palin and even the Bengals fan, “Joe the Plumber,” think about community organizers.  (For some reason, “Joe the Plumber” has a politically quixotic sound to it, and makes me wonder if the GOP is just fighting windmills).

As Giuliani and Palin made clear at the GOP convention, community organizers are people to castigate and laugh at as worthless. In other words, Giuliani would like people to fear the events of September 11, 2001—but if you volunteer in order to inspire as a means to eviscerate fear induced by September 11, 2001, you’re a bum!

After 9/11, I was on the GOP bandwagon as Dennis Miller has been. After the 2008 election though, I saw their fork-tongued messages for what they really are. 

After all, the “Thousand Points of Light” speech by former President George H.W. Bush was about community involvement, while former President Ronald Reagan would comment that the morality of the day would be the same as the morality of the future on far-away planets.

Funnily enough, the GOP’s sense of community involvement seemed to end with the year that coincides with the movie title 2001: A Space Odyssey, which is a movie that always reminds of the phrase “Thousand points of light.”

 

“Do You Know the Way to San Jose?”

Some people might ask, “Why waste valuable intellectual energy on a topic like sports?”  My answer is simple, because the topic has no direct consequence in the real world.

If a team loses, it is not the end of the world (although, it can feel like it is).

Sports though can inculcate a reason to be motivated, which can affect the real world.  Frankly, I think, “Just Win, Baby’ is a far better maxim than, “Git-r-done,” which has been adopted by the US Air Force.

In the year 2000 the Raiders began a three-year run for the Super Bowl. Yes, it is true, not just a spin on a Conan O’Brien joke.

I became motivated by the likes of Jon Gruden, Rich Gannon, Jerry Rice, Tim Brown, and Al Davis in the emotional aftermath of September 11. 

All of whom were intense or tenacious and never gave-up even when the world thought they should.  Nowadays, people generalize the accomplishments made by the aforementioned people to contend for the Super Bowl when they had been written off as over-the-hill or crazy.

Why?

Because people prefer to gravitate towards their perception of perfection and the Raiders did not represent the perception of perfection, and yet, they could defeat the teams that did represent the perception of perfection.

And after all these years, I may lean on some old familiar ways, but that tree in the Santa Cruz Mountains along Old San Jose Road is now alive and well.

Just win, baby.

/* Style Definitions */

table.MsoNormalTable

{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;

mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;

mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;

mso-style-noshow:yes;

mso-style-parent:””;

mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;

mso-para-margin:0in;

mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;

mso-pagination:widow-orphan;

font-size:10.0pt;

font-family:”Times New Roman”;

mso-ansi-language:#0400;

mso-fareast-language:#0400;

mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

My City of Ruins: 9/11 Benefit

/* Style Definitions */

table.MsoNormalTable

{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;

mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;

mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;

mso-style-noshow:yes;

mso-style-parent:””;

mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;

mso-para-margin:0in;

mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;

mso-pagination:widow-orphan;

font-size:10.0pt;

font-family:”Times New Roman”;

mso-ansi-language:#0400;

mso-fareast-language:#0400;

mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

New Knick: Darko Milicic and Serbians Played On Even as the Bombs Fell

The Truth of Victory and Tangents on Trivial Things

The Greatest Game Never Played: Oakland Raiders @ New England Patriots

 

 

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Why Terrell Davis Belongs in the Hall of Fame (By a Raider Fan)

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

I note “by a Raider fan” because, in this argument, I will be speaking against my interests.  Raider fans and Bronco fans are mortal enemies, and if the Raiders went 1-15, yet won in Denver, I would be happy.

I, however, give credit where credit is due.

As anyone would know, we Raider fans are characterized as “rowdies” and “creeps” by the sports media, and Jay Mariotti of Around the Horn has admitted it.

Mariotti shockingly admitted that he, and possibly others, do not investigate stories about the Raiders, but simply rely on gossip. 

That is an admission of defamation because you are saying that you cannot provide substantiation for your statements.  Frankly, I would like to see the Oakland Raiders pore through Mariotti’s articles and find the material to sue him.  That could just be a fantasy, but it is what I would like to see. 

After all, people like Mariotti claim to be inherently better reporters than bloggers, so why can’t people like Mariotti be held to a higher standard?

As the saying goes, “make it global,” thus it is not a problem with just one reporter that claims to be unbiased and yet makes up news, it is a problem with every reporter that claims to be unbiased and yet makes up news.

I am every sportswriter’s thorn in the side.  I do not preach craziness; I preach confidence.  That, to some, is craziness.

The reason that many fail in their analysis is that they do not believe in what they think, so they seek affirmation from others who could just as easily be wrong.

Why else would people protest at Town Hall meetings in order to say, “Watch Glenn Beck?”

Granted, you are not seeking affirmation from the guy with a Joe Dirt mullet, but the act of seeking affirmation for your opinions is what hinders you.  It is like a Chinese finger trap, you must do the opposite of what you think will work.

I know that I’m Mr. Controversial with my interpretations of real news (ever heard of that Jay?), which range from apologizing to Michael Vick for slavery and post-slavery racial oppression and arguing that Roger Goodell couldn’t get his Spygate story straight, to believing that extraordinary justice was given to Darko Milicic for the NATO bombings of Serbia in 1999.

I have also argued that Dan Marino and Dan Fouts do not belong in the Hall of Fame.

To me, justice is ultimately what sports are about. Sure, you can view them abstractly to predict what will happen, but ultimately every great athlete is there for a reason that others are not: Justice.

Their will or desire determined their presence and was coordinated by the selectors of will known as sports executives.

The issue, however, is not who is biased or who is not, because I do believe that everyone is biased.

If you had no bias, you would lack motivation: a bias is just intellectual fuel that people suppress because they think they have to.  Often times, for immediate gratification (money), and the feeling that, “I could do that, but I don’t want to.” 

Thomas Edison, for instance, was incredibly biased in favor of direct current, which he discovered, as opposed to alternating current, which was discovered by Nikola Tesla.  Did Edison’s biases stop him from creating the metaphorically great idea, the light bulb?

Nope.

Thus, it is just a matter of how well you defend your bias.  The problem is when you lie by claiming to be unbiased.  Be open about it, go down swinging if you must, and keep trying.

Shouting out, “You’re biased” is just hypocrisy.

With that said, arguing in favor of Terrell Davis for the Hall of Fame is not something I can stomach, but I believe that it is consistent with many of my previous arguments.  This is just the point at which it has become uncomfortable.

Here we go.

I must start with an indirect arguments about the standards for induction by pro sports’ Halls of Fame because two of the Big Three (baseball and football) revolve heavily around statistics and the longevity of a career as a reflection of greatness.

The problem I have had with Hall of Fame inductions is that in the past generation, the Halls have put a premium on statistics, rather than championships.

These same writers will turn around and cry about how athletes cheated them by inflating their statistics with steroids.  (Hey, Jay, I bet you didn’t investigate Sammy Sosa either.)  Those players only did so because of the “magic numbers” created by writers who thought statistics reflected greatness more than championships do.

Thus, by fixation on statistics, the writers lowered the bar.  The players ceased to care about victory as long as they got paid and built a resume of meaningless statistics. 

Just ask Manny Ramirez. 

Ramirez took heat in 2007 when he claimed that it did not matter if the Red Sox won the World Series or not.  Fortunately, for Ramirez, the Sox won the Series that year.

I however take it as evidence of something that I like to say: If you do not care about winning, you are probably on drugs.  With the juicers, winning is just incidental.

Unlike rock musicians however, drugs are just the key to something that they do not understand, and which might lead to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Ultimately, what is it that an athlete should be on the field to do? 

To win—that is the only answer.

Statistics are just the consolation prize for when you lose.  Occasionally, one player comes along, who is mired in losing for a long time, yet he keeps posting great statistics, so fans and writers try to recognize that, but in doing so, lose sight of the real reason that the game is played: to win, not rack up statistics.

Thus, if writers truly want to send a message to players to stop juicing, then I would suggest that they make new examples with their inductions.

The standard I set is, “Championships + Statistics = Greatness.”  Yet, people are willing to isolate statistics to the detriment of championships.

Frankly, Doug Williams did in half a season what Dan Marino tried for an entire career to do-win the Super Bowl.

Yet, the Hall glorifies a quarterback whose career was defined mostly by 1984-1986 while being the top NFL passer and appearing in the Super Bowl with the Miami Dolphins.   It glorifies a career that, after 1986, was mostly average, but long.

That is not to say that anyone can play in the pros for many years.  I find it quite odd that Hall preference goes to those who never accomplished the goal that they set out to do: win.

I guarantee, like Joe Namath, that Marino would trade his statistics for a ring.  If not, why did he play?

After all this, the argument to support Terrell Davis is quite simple.  Davis’ career was defined mostly by what he did in 1996-1998 by being the top NFL runner and winning two Super Bowl rings with the Denver Broncos.

In two seasons, Davis did far more than most athletes can ever dream of doing. 

That is greatness.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

Why The Raiders Should Sign Safety Bernard Pollard

The Chiefs released starting safety Bernard Pollard yesterday, after they signed former Bear, Mike Brown.

Brown, a 32-year-old veteran, has been oft-injured.

Clearly, Scott Pioli is hoping that Brown can play to his caliber, but I think the Chiefs are letting one get away by releasing Pollard.

I know, I know, the Chiefs defense has not been great.  But it was not the fault of the DBs like Pollard; it has been problems with the front seven.

Sometimes, a team must have the confidence to believe that another team made a bad move.

Thus, this is a golden opportunity for the Raiders to sign Pollard and release Michael Huff, whose contract is much heftier than Pollard’s.

I know that Pollard has played on the strong side, which is currently slated for Tyvon Branch, but I think Branch is better fit for the free-safety side, and thus, Pollard would allow for the Raiders to make that move.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

17 Seconds To Fame: A Proposal Of Nicknames For Oakland Raiders

We have all heard that no one can give themselves a nickname. I happen to believe the same thing about styles in comedy. A comedian just has to have the confidence to say what he or she believes and let the trained viewers define it.

For instance, if you try to be the “laid back Canadian” it will come across as trite. Surely, there is a new style waiting to be seen, it just results from the willingness to have the confidence to put your foot down on what you believe.

I mention the “laid back Canadian” because someone once asked me for help writing jokes, and that he wanted to be the “laid back Canadian,” and I told him that it was like trying to give yourself a nickname.

You just gotta do your thing and let the audience decide what it is.

The question here is the origin of the nickname. What exactly determines whether a person should have a nickname?

I, for instance, had tried “the hobby horse” which is an abstract reference to the Dada art movement of the early 20th century. I also tried “Pinnocchio’s Twin” to no avail, but people have called me “Mr. X,” because well, it is my name.

You can’t give yourself a nickname; however, you can give one to others, just as the sports media quickly dubbed Tom Cable as “The Cable Guy.”

To me, the art of a nickname is to see something about someone else that others don’t see.

I say that because it is a fact that 17 seconds of negative thinking has been shown to reproduce negative thinking, thus forcing yourself to think positively for 17 seconds will result in positive and proactive thoughts. Thus, you as an individual have a degree of control over how you view the world, and how you react to it.

That is yet another reason why I can’t stand the propaganda that the sports media will spin about the Raiders. Just ask Jay “Marionette” Mariotti (funny thing is, the only letter lost is an, “I”).

It might sound nihilistic, but you can essentially program the cognition’s (thoughts) of your brain.

You gotta start somewhere.

Thus, I propose to Raider Nation that we must take a proactive effort in giving nicknames to Raider players, and that if we keep repeating them, eventually they will catch on.

Nnamdi Asomugha: Another easily-derived nickname “N/A” or “not available,” as in, his side of the field is, “not available.”

Johnnie Lee Higgins: The nickname I propose for Higgins is simple: if you say his first two initials “JL” it sounds like “jail.” Since his returns are electric and get the Raiders out of a jam, I came to “Jailbreak.” Thus, the nickname for Higgins is “Johnnie Jailbreak” or just, “Jailbreak.” That nickname would have all kinds of marketing value and theme songs.

Richard Seymour: We in Raider Nation need to welcome the newest member of Raider Nation, who will surely be around for years to come. I think the best nickname comes from Robin Hood with King Richard the Lionheart. Thus, Richard Seymour is “King Richard,” or “the Lion.”

Greg Ellis: Considering that Greg Ellis, the designated sack specialist, came from the UNC and played for the Dallas Cowboys, his nickname can be, “The Hired Gun.”

Kirk Morrison and Thomas Howard: Two underrated linebackers for the Raiders that take the brunt of the blame when the defense collapses in the late 4th quarter or against the Saints. Howard came from the University of Texas, El Paso which reminds me of country western music (“El Paso” by Marty Robbins), which inexplicably reminds me of Smokey and the Bandit.

Thus, Morrison is Smokey and Howard is the Bandit. I hope that puts pressure on Jon Alston to step-up in order to earn a nickname from Raider Nation.

Trevor Scott: Here’s a nickname that is easy to understand, “TS.” Scott showed that he can be feisty and hard to handle as a rookie in 2008, so “tough s*it” certainly seems fitting.

Darren McFadden, Justin Fargas, Michael Bush: I dropped the previous idea and decided to change this one to The Allies of Victory.

The Offensive Line and Oren O’Neal: Ever since the Raiders selected Robert Gallery, I have thought he looked like a character from the Lord of the Rings. Considering that, the Raiders organziation has three Super Bowl rings, then it is not far fetched to call our blockers and unheralded but tenacious field warriors, “The Orcs” (does that mean Al Davis is Golem?).

It would also help explain some of the costumes in the Black Hole.

The Receiving Corp: The Raiders have speed at receiver and grinders at tight-end.  I like the nicknames of, “The Burners and The Bulls.”

The Special Teams: Considering that we in Raider Nation have the reputation for being the fringe and whacko “conspiracy theorists,” I think it would make sense to call our special-teams unit, “The Lone Gunmen.” Obviously, “Lone” and “Gunmen” contradict each other, but the idea is that on special teams, each player is essentially acting as one, it just happens to be within a group.

Plus, special teams players are often called, “gunners.”

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

What the Richard Seymour Acquisition Says About the Raiders’ AFC West Rivals

When I saw the news that the Raiders had acquired defensive lineman Richard Seymour from the Patriots, I was slightly befuddled.

Unlike some writers however, I can see this clearly.  If you ask Pete Prisco, he thinks that it is about retaliation by the Patriots.  That however is a blessed critique, because Prisco is such an uncannily bad analyst that his opinions are reliably wrong.

Reading Prisco’s opinions is practically cheating, because by thinking the opposite of the “Effing Retard,” you will almost always be right.

When Prisco called the Raiders an “instant contender” by acquiring Randy Moss in 2005, I shuttered because I knew he was wrong.

Thus, when the Effing Retard called it retaliation and roots for disloyalty and indulged in his own vileness, it made my day, because the chances are, this move by the Raiders will be great.

This summer I had written articles on why the Raiders should trade Derrick Burgess to New England for Vince Wilfork. 

It seemed to me that Wilfork would be expendable, because his contract would end after the season.

It seemed that Wilfork would be expendable, because I didn’t believe that New England could afford both Wilfork and Seymour, when they have Tom Brady and Randy Moss on the payroll.

Funny thing is that the ripple effect from the Randy Moss trade between Oakland and New England would make Richard Seymour tradeable for salary reasons.

The reality is that the Patriots can’t afford Seymour, if they expect to resign Brady, Logan Mankins and Wilfork.

If they resigned Brady and Seymour, they would likely lose Mankins AND Wilfork.  When it comes to cutting salaries, teams usually prefer to protect quantity not the best quality.

By acquiring Seymour, the Raiders made a move that I had wanted to see, but for a different player, while the Raiders also traded Derrick Burgess to New England for a pair of draft-picks.

Nevertheless, the Raiders paid a first-round pick in 2011 in exchange for Seymour, which is a gamble that the pick won’t be in the top 10 or even 15.

At the same time, Seymour was a top pick (after current Raider Gerard Warren) and has lived up to the expectations and then some. 

Even if the Patriots get a high pick, the Raiders have acquired a player that you would want from a high pick, anyway.

Al Davis clearly wants to win now and to hell with it later. (At his age, would it be to hell or heaven with it later?)

Seymour will enter the Raiders in a similar fashion as he entered the Patriots in 2001: going to a franchise that was 5-11.

Meaning that, Seymour has gone through the tough situations and knows how to overcome them.

If you ask me, Seymour has been the glue of the New England defense.  In 2007, the Patriots dominated the first half of that season en route to going 16-0, in that, they scored high, and kept the opponent low.  After Seymour went down, they Patriots went through nail-biters because the defense wasn’t the same.

I’m not saying that the Raiders will win the Super Bowl, but I do think they are now a legitimate threat to knock off the Chargers in the AFC West.

The price might seem steep, but at the same time, it says something about the Raiders. They acquired Seymour and the Broncos and Chiefs did not, which might explain the price.

Both Kansas City and Denver have a need for a player of Seymour’s caliber, and both teams have ties to New England, yet Oakland seems to have won the day.

Former New England assistant Josh McDaniels and the Broncos had earlier acquired backup Le Kevin Smith from the Patriots. Can you imagine what would have happened if the Broncos had acquired Seymour? The Broncos would have been the toast of the media for a great move at the last minute to shore up a questionable defense.

Obviously, I can’t prove that the Broncos wanted Seymour, but I would find it hard to believe that they would not. Seymour has played primarily in the 3-4 in New England, which is the same system as Denver. Seymour has spent time as a down lineman in the 4-3, which is the base defense in Oakland.

Simultaneously, the Chiefs, ran by former Patriots exec Scott Pioli, also missed out on Seymour. I know that Kansas City has Glenn Dorsey currently in the same position that Seymour plays, but don’t tell me that you wouldn’t want a first-team All-Pro and three-time Super Bowl-winner instead of a second-year player.

You might say, “Well, the Patriots didn’t want him,” but I think that the issue was money, not talent. The Patriots could no longer afford to retain Seymour, without losing multiple starters. It seems that New England has had a fire sale of their defensive starters, with some retiring, and wanted to focus on younger players. So not for a lack of talent, but that meant trading Seymour.

Bottom line is that I think this was a great deal for both sides.

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

With Blackouts Looming, Should the Raiders Return to Los Angeles?

Here is something that I have pondered.

In this economic climate, and now with the prospect of an uncapped NFL season in 2010, I must wonder about the fates of “small market” teams.

I say “small market” in quotations because I often wonder about the veracity of that term.  For instance, the Oakland Metropolitan area alone has a population greater than the state of Massachusetts, where Boston is considered a large market.

With that said, it is undeniable that the Raiders suffer from being in the unfavorable market of Oakland. Why it is unfavorable is another question.  Meanwhile, the NFL has had no interest in seeing the Raiders play in the favorable market of Los Angeles.

Before I continue, if you actually believe the people that seek only to assassinate the character of Al Davis, then you’re a fool.  Why would they do that?  Thanks in large part to Al Davis, the NFL has twice been ruled an illegal monopoly back in the 1980s.

Subjective journalists such as Jay “Marionette” Mariotti have openly admitted that they believe any and all gossip about Davis and the Raiders. Thus, they do not investigate. They root for internal violence and discord.  (Side note: A “marionette” is a puppet that is controlled by strings.)

Obviously, the Raiders have been mired in futility since 2003, but I do believe that the mass media has a collective interest in keeping it that way. 

Why?

Surely there can be a plethora of motives, but I do believe that the interest of the mass media is to denigrate and sabotage the Raiders and Davis however they can.  Partially because media outlets such as ESPN are just lap-dogs of the NFL by law.  Seriously. 

Thanks to the anti-trust exemption on media rights given to the NFL by the US Congress, the NFL controls who can broadcast or rebroadcast games or portions of games.  Thus, if outlets like ESPN don’t tow the NFL line (to stop Al Davis), then the NFL can pull the plug.

That’s not theory.  It’s the law.  A law that has begged a question in my mind as to whether that exemption for the NFL violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Thus, the only independent source of sports information, sadly, is the blogosphere.

I say sadly because I realize that the blogosphere is just an array of people.  Some are nut jobs or just careless, but others make an honest effort.  Nevertheless, the pro journalists of the world feel disconcerted, irritated, or angered by the blogosphere because it effectively questions their life.

They went to school and dedicated their life to climbing the ladder only to see a torrent of good and bad info from the blogosphere become more popular than the work they dedicated their life too. This after they had tried to deny the rising tide of popularity for the Internet.

I started reading the real news of the newspaper (not the comics) when I was 13. Even if I didn’t understand the story, I kept reading it or supplemental information until it made sense.

I believe that I grew-up with the same love for news that the journalists of today had and were inspired by.  To me, though, the mark of a great journalist is the willingness to learn what you did not want to know. 

It seems to me that many in the sports media have succumb to the complacency of blissful ignorance, especially when there’s plenty of perks to go with being co-opted.

Co-option is what debate shows are (on any network).

I almost went that route after my economics teacher invited me to a lecture at CSU-MB in 2001 (at the age of 18) between Leon Panetta, Clint Eastwood, and Tom Brokaw.  I approach news the way a physician would approach the condition of a patient, “do no harm” to the truth.

In the case of the Marionette, whom I’ve challenged to a fight, he has admitted to being an agent of lies and one that might ask, “What is truth?”

But I came of age when the popularity of Internet was undeniable (and the old AOL Newswire was awesome) so it did not seem feasible to borrow money for school only to graduate to an economic sector devoid of opportunity outside of a few big markets that require a cut-throat personality to get ahead.

Perhaps that was one part self-defeatism and one part pragmatism, I don’t know.  I decided to take a different course, regardless, and I would like to believe that the real journalists of the world would appreciate the intent.

That, though, is what “grinds my gears” about the coverage of the Raiders.  Raider fans get characterized as “thugs” and “crazies” when the reality is that there are more fans like me than the stereotypical fans.  The mass media treats Raider fans as just a collection of the fringe when really, it is just nature’s off-switch.

Sometimes though, you must unplug from the off-switch.

How does that connect to the thesis question?

I wonder whether the Raiders should return to Los Angeles where the Raiders would be in a more favorable market, which they will need in order to compete in a capless NFL.

Assuming that the NFL goes capless, the majority of small market NFL teams, and even some of the bigger markets, will suffer because teams like Washington and Dallas have more money to sign and retain their players.

In this economy, where blackouts are looming for 12 teams, would it be fair for the NFL to force a team (like the Raiders) to stay in an unfavorable market, or to determine the interests of that team in relation to the other 31 teams? 

Shouldn’t a franchise be allowed to determine what is in their best interests?  If they aren’t allowed to do so, then the NFL will become an unfair paradigm where teams like Washington will compete by virtue of payroll. Meanwhile, other teams will get left to wither on the vine, or just barely survive to be along for the ride.

The NFL won’t care if the same teams win, so long as people keep paying to see it.

Agents will procure short-term contracts for rookies so that the player can leave as soon as possible to cash-in with another team because the franchise tag will no longer exist. This would be unlike the MLB where teams are guaranteed to have six years from a player in the Major League.

The follow-up answer has been that a single team cannot compete against itself (perhaps that is why some, such as The Marionette, will root for the Raiders to implode).

Here’s another view of that.  If we are speaking theoretically, as in a team competing against itself, then here is another theoretical. 

What if an NFL team (like the Raiders) wanted to schedule games outside of the NFL, against leagues like the CFL and now the UFL?

If you are a fan of team that is facing blackouts this season, you should realize that the NFL is an unfair monopoly that will only be a detriment to your team’s ability to compete. 

Thus, as much as it may be to your chagrin, you should see that the anti-Davis propaganda is merely meant to dupe you into believing that the NFL will protect your better interests. They will not, as the prospect of blackouts has made all too apparent.

So has the prospect of a Super Bowl in London and the Brady Rule, which is a rule that only makes me think that it is the NFL’s answer to lebensraum.  And a Super Bowl in London is just the NFL’s desire to rob their fans and stroke their egos by playing for non-rowdy fans.

Frankly, I think that if you’re willing to pay the exorbitant prices required for an NFL game, you deserve to act like a fool (as long as it is non-violent or vandalistic).  The idea of a Super Bowl in London is just the proof in the pudding that the NFL hates the fans, but they will take your money.

Only the team for which you are a fan will protect your interests (except Art Modell).

Some may wonder why I bother to question the NFL when I can just watch the games.  In the NFL of Roger Goodell, however, I can’t help but wonder what exactly it is that I’m watching.

Nowadays, all I see from the NFL is a commissioner who doesn’t care about the integrity of the actual game (Spygate). A game that looks more like a racist blueprint (Brady Rule; excessive suspensions), and a media that has either willingly or unwillingly gone along with it because, “everybody does it.”

Do they understand how depressing it is to hear a media defend corruption because “everybody does it?”  This was also the same media that badmouthed the Raiders of the 1980s for “cheating” or playing dirty, when really, the Raiders merely used loop holes.

A loop hole isn’t cheating, it is proof that a rule was ill-conceived.

Apparently, when the NFL doesn’t care then neither do they.  The mass media is more willing to accept the word of a liar (Belichik) or one that has destroyed evidence (Goodell), and attack the ideas and questions of free-thinkers.

Allowing a franchise to move at their will is, in fact, better for fans in the long run rather than forcing a team to stay and wither in an unfavorable market. Ask yourself what is worse: Your team not playing in your city, or your team not playing at all?

Otherwise, your team could go the way of your house and NFL champions like the Providence Steamroller and cease to even exist.

And something tells me that the NFL would love to see that happen to the Raiders … and eventually replace them with an expansion team in Los Angeles as final revenge for the truth that Davis exposed in court.

Believe me, if it can happen to the Raiders, then it can happen to your team too, regardless of their success on the field.

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Spygate Has Shown that the NFL Violated Civil Rights

The Greatest Game Never Played: Oakland Raiders @ New England Patriots

Just Win, Baby: The Truth about Al Davis and the Oakland Raiders

Did Lane Kiffin Collude with Michael Lombardi in the Randy Moss Trade?

The Reality of What I Really Believe (About Boston and the Patriots)

The Truth of Victory and Tangents on Trivial Things

Read more NFL news on BleacherReport.com

« Previous Page

NFL Sport Channel Latest

• Just How Far Would You Go?
• Sorry Rex, But It Isn’t Happening
• Super Bowl Predictions: Five Stat-Free Reasons Why the Eagles Will Reach The Super Bowl
• Seahawks Attempt to Turn Corner With Heavy Pursuit of Pete Carroll
• Bill Cowher Unlikely to Coach in 2010