Gannon, what the hell are you doing? The Raiders are paying you $7 million this year. How dare you throw 2 interceptions to wide-open DB's!!!!?!?!?!?! Who the hell do you think you are? Neil O'Donnell? Oh well, at least it wasn't a division game.
Sounds like Gannon caught a case of the Fiedler virus. One of the symptoms is you become so light headed it leads to stupidity & poor decision making
It was a good game, a little scary because I thought the Steelers dominated for the most part. I couldn't believe they gave up two long TD passes. But in the end, they drove the ball down and kicked the winning field goal with no time left. The defense held, but almost gave up the game.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Steelerfan_2004)</div><div class='quotemain'>It was a good game, a little scary because I thought the Steelers dominated for the most part. I couldn't believe they gave up two long TD passes. But in the end, they drove the ball down and kicked the winning field goal with no time left. The defense held, but almost gave up the game.</div> I guess those long TD's are a by-product of living and dying by the blitz, which Pittsburgh seemed to do on every play. Pittsburgh's strength seems to be in the front 7, and when they didn't get to Gannon, he made the most of it. Also, what's up with all the offensive line substitutions? I saw Robert Gallery play at least 3 different positions all within the same football game? Isn't pre-season the time to play musical chairs on the offensive line? To Gallery's credit, I thought he had an outstanding first NFL game given all the things that he was asked to do. Oh, one more thing. Gannon had a "tuck" play that was ruled a fumble. You know the one, where the arm and ball are both moving forward and released at eye-level. To anyone who watched that game on TV, please explain to me the difference between that play and the famous Tom Brady tuck from a few years ago.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Return of the Raider)</div><div class='quotemain'>Gannon, what the hell are you doing? The Raiders are paying you $7 million this year. How dare you throw 2 interceptions to wide-open DB's!!!!?!?!?!?! Who the hell do you think you are? Neil O'Donnell? Oh well, at least it wasn't a division game.</div> dude, gannon did have a good game... just a cruddy first half
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I guess those long TD's are a by-product of living and dying by the blitz, which Pittsburgh seemed to do on every play. Pittsburgh's strength seems to be in the front 7, and when they didn't get to Gannon, he made the most of it.</div> It's more a product of 3 new starters in the secondary. Those guys will need some time to mature. They are fast and very athletic but have very little experience. Two new starting safeties make it tough to cover the deep ball at times. They were obviously confused on both deep plays.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nflfan04)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Return of the Raider)</div><div class='quotemain'>Gannon, what the hell are you doing? The Raiders are paying you $7 million this year. How dare you throw 2 interceptions to wide-open DB's!!!!?!?!?!?! Who the hell do you think you are? Neil O'Donnell? Oh well, at least it wasn't a division game.</div> dude, gannon did have a good game... just a cruddy first half</div> Gannon turned the ball over 4 times. 2 in the first half, 2 in the second half....Raiders -3 on turnovers will not win too many games. It's easy for me to overlook anything else that he might have done.
He had two passes for 140 yards and two TD's. Take those away and he was 18 for 35 for 165 yards and 4 TO's... The stats are a bit deceiving nflfan...
Yeah I saw the game yesterday & A) Gannon was awful at times & brilliant at others that was NOT a fumble the ball was going forward what more do u need to see?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah I saw the game yesterday & A) Gannon was awful at times & brilliant at others that was NOT a fumble the ball was going forward what more do u need to see?</div> So you agree that Gannon did not fumble yesterday on that play?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Steelerfan_2004)</div><div class='quotemain'>He definitely fumbled.</div> Well, it's in the books regardless of what we believe. I think the Steelers looked really good yesterday up front. When you play defense against the Raiders, you pretty much have to put a lot of pressure on Gannon and disrupt him as much as possible. Otherwise, he'll pick you apart. The Steelers seemed to be in the backfield all day. As for Pittsburgh's offense, I thought they looked very good throughout the game. It helps that they have many returning players from last season I suppose. Staley is a big upgrade over Zereoue no doubt.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Return of the Raider)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Steelerfan_2004)</div><div class='quotemain'>He definitely fumbled.</div> Well, it's in the books regardless of what we believe. I think the Steelers looked really good yesterday up front. When you play defense against the Raiders, you pretty much have to put a lot of pressure on Gannon and disrupt him as much as possible. Otherwise, he'll pick you apart. The Steelers seemed to be in the backfield all day. As for Pittsburgh's offense, I thought they looked very good throughout the game. It helps that they have many returning players from last season I suppose. Staley is a big upgrade over Zereoue no doubt.</div> Well put. I think you summed it up.
First off, I watched the game in a bar where the only television audio was for the Rams game. I didn?t/don?t have the benefit of announcers or referee comments to make things clear for me. Lord knows that Sports Center doesn?t clear anything up. I think that the play calling on O was suspect at the beginning of the game. Bam. Bam. Throw it away is no way to start the game against that D. Based on some of the preseason action, I was hoping for some of what the RAIDERS did against Denver a few years ago? Pass, pass, pass, and then pass some more. I think that the quick passes would have pulled the backers off the line enough to open things up for the running of Wheatley. Running him up the gut when the line was stacked definitely wasn?t working. I?m a little disappointed that the RAIDERS needed to challenge three calls so early in the game. I?d argue about the pass/fumble, but not too strongly. If it had been called a pass, I don?t think that they could have overturned it either. It was close, but I think it was a pass. My main reason for thinking that is that the ball didn?t skitter out a yard or so, it flew forward with some velocity, and then bounced forward when it hit the ground. Gannon didn?t look sharp at all. He needs to lose that sidearm delivery when under pressure. It takes too long to get rid of it. The picks were on nobody but Gannon. On one, I don?t know how he didn?t see the defender waiting for the ball. On the other he looked to be throwing it away in a lazy manner and didn?t get it out of bounds. Wheatley didn?t have the pop I saw in a couple of the preseason games. That could all be because the seams in the blocking where there were suppose to be holes were filled with black jerseys. Not sure why they felt the need try and send Wheatley outside on some runs? Didn?t work for shit. Fargas still looks like a gem to me. It might have been the fourteen point lead changed Pittsburgh scheme, but I wouldn?t count on that. I think that I?m going to enjoy watching him play for some time to come. Surprised to see Gabriel making plays? Don?t be. He?s a fast MoFo. Wouldn?t be a RAIDER post without at least one gripe about the refs? It seemed to me that the refs were out of position to make calls several times during the game. The weird stuff went both ways for the most part, but did anyone else see what I think I saw in the refs?
[quote name='Send Em Back Al'] I think that the play calling on O was suspect at the beginning of the game. Bam. Bam. Throw it away is no way to start the game against that D. Based on some of the preseason action, I was hoping for some of what the RAIDERS did against Denver a few years ago? Pass, pass, pass, and then pass some more. [/quote] Remember when the Raiders played Pitt in 2002? The defense looks a lot the same to me. You're right, they should have passed more short to medium from the beginning. Knowing that Pittsburgh's defense is vulnerable to that type of attack, why not? They're awfully stingy up front, but their DB's are very beatable. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] I think that the quick passes would have pulled the backers off the line enough to open things up for the running of Wheatley. Running him up the gut when the line was stacked definitely wasn?t working. I?m a little disappointed that the RAIDERS needed to challenge three calls so early in the game. I?d argue about the pass/fumble, but not too strongly. If it had been called a pass, I don?t think that they could have overturned it either. It was close, but I think it was a pass. My main reason for thinking that is that the ball didn?t skitter out a yard or so, it flew forward with some velocity, and then bounced forward when it hit the ground. [/quote] [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] Wouldn?t be a RAIDER post without at least one gripe about the refs? It seemed to me that the refs were out of position to make calls several times during the game. The weird stuff went both ways for the most part, but did anyone else see what I think I saw in the refs [/quote] If they would just call it correctly the first time, we wouldn't have to challenge them so much. If they have to challenge 3 times in the first half (and win the challenges), what does that say of the level of officiating that we're seeing? It really stinks. After 3 successful challenges, I think that teams should keep getting awarded "one more" for each successful one to follow, and then can it after the first unsuccessful one. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] Gannon didn?t look sharp at all. He needs to lose that sidearm delivery when under pressure. It takes too long to get rid of it. The picks were on nobody but Gannon. On one, I don?t know how he didn?t see the defender waiting for the ball. On the other he looked to be throwing it away in a lazy manner and didn?t get it out of bounds. [/quote] Agreed. Gannon stunk yesterday. He's been around this league too long to be making decisions like that. I'm not used to seeing him make so many mental errors. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] Wheatley didn?t have the pop I saw in a couple of the preseason games. That could all be because the seams in the blocking where there were suppose to be holes were filled with black jerseys. Not sure why they felt the need try and send Wheatley outside on some runs? Didn?t work for shit. [/quote] Have you noticed that Adam Treu is no Barrett Robbins? Barrett seemed to be a much better at calling blocks on the line. Why do I think that? because too many times I saw the pressure come straight up the middle, unchallenged. True would block down on one guy, then let another guy run by him on the other side. Treu is supposed to call the blocking audibles and I dont think it's working. Did you see how much substitution and shuffling went on that day? Robert Gallery played in at least three different positions on the O-line that day (His first NFL game!). Some like to use the word "gel" when talking about o-lines coming together. I think the Raider o-line is far from "gelling" right now based on what I've seen so far. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] Fargas still looks like a gem to me. It might have been the fourteen point lead changed Pittsburgh scheme, but I wouldn?t count on that. I think that I?m going to enjoy watching him play for some time to come. [/quote] Bad news, Norv said today that Fargas has a case of turf toe....it's still to be determinned whether he'll be playing next week.
CRAP! on the Vargas thing. I agree that I saw defensive players running up between the C and G all day long. The long history of RAIDER centers kicking butt and taking names may be on a short break. No team should have to expend their two/three challenges in the first half... And that was my point about refs not covering their area. I have said all along that if you win the challenge, you should keep your challenge... But in a typical game that might amount to nearly a dozen challenges to the refs alleged perfection. The PIT DB's were woeful at times, but the pressure kept them safe. Did I mention the four times (twice on each side) where S&BB and I both questioned our understanding of the new way of calling the play when a receiver was held or pushed outside five yards? Bottom line. The RAIDERS had a shot at that game, and managed to throw it away by playing crappy when they had the advantage late. Sure, they played crappy early too. But the late part is what I'm talking about here. The defense looked good for much of the game, but they gave up a bundle late and gave up a FG late. Steelers win, the RAIDERSgo to 0-1.
[quote name='Send Em Back Al'] I agree that I saw defensive players running up between the C and G all day long. The long history of RAIDER centers kicking butt and taking names may be on a short break. [/quote] (what I heard on the radio today) Norv was asked about J. Grove. He basically said that Jake is not ready to deal with the line blocking audibles yet. Great. Now we know that we have two centers that can't audible. I wish Barrett Robbins didn't have career-killing knee problems. The Raiders tended to be better blockers when he was in the middle. I think Grove can be a Robbins in a year or two though. Please prove me right, Jake. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] No team should have to expend their two/three challenges in the first half... And that was my point about refs not covering their area. I have said all along that if you win the challenge, you should keep your challenge... But in a typical game that might amount to nearly a dozen challenges to the refs alleged perfection. [/quote] Paying them little and tipping them well....oops, did I say that...? What am I suggesting? It's amazing the reported wage that they get vs. how much this industry rakes in. Just kidding, the refs are all on the up and up, despite Mr. Davis's litigations vs. te NFL. (okay, that must be the beer talking) [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] The PIT DB's were woeful at times, but the pressure kept them safe. Did I mention the four times (twice on each side) where S&BB and I both questioned our understanding of the new way of calling the play when a receiver was held or pushed outside five yards? [/quote] I really never looked downfield too much during that game. I was too focused on the Steelers swarming around Gannon. [quote name='Send Em Back Al'] Bottom line. The RAIDERS had a shot at that game, and managed to throw it away by playing crappy when they had the advantage late. Sure, they played crappy early too. But the late part is what I'm talking about here. The defense looked good for much of the game, but they gave up a bundle late and gave up a FG late. Steelers win, the RAIDERSgo to 0-1.[/quote] But hey, at least Callahan is gone. The Raiders now have a future without him. Norv is doing ok so far. I expect him (an outsider) to be tweaking things a lot in his first year, like the o-line. I do expect to win the division this year though. The team is just too loaded to expect anything less.
